Find a Lawyer

Criminal Miscellaneous No. 1210-B of 1983, decided on 15th June, 1983.

--- Ss. 497 (5) & 497 (2)-Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), Ss. 10 & 11-Pre-arrest bail Application for cancellation-Bail before arrest granted to respon dent by Additional Sessions Judge on ground that respondent, mother of prosecutrix, could not force her to be subjected to zina- bil-jabr by her own paramour and that eight days delay in lodging F. I. R. was not explained and it was a case of further inquiry with in meaning of S. 497 (2), Criminal Procedure Code-Conclusion arrived at by Additional Sessions Judge, held, unexceptionable- Application for cancellation of bail dismissed.

Munir Ahmad Bhatti for Petitioner.

Ch. Muhammad Ashraf Azeem for Accused Respondent.

The respondents Abdul Majeed and Mst. Sardaran who were involved in a case under section 10 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979, arising out of F. I. R. No. 35, dated 28th March, 1983 of Police Station Mochiwala, District Jhang were released through pre-arrest bail by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jhang, vide order dated 27th April, 1983.

2. Mst. Seeman. the prosecutrix' has filed the instant application seeking cancellation of the bail of the respondents under section 497 (5), C r. P. C.

3. The allegations against the respondents are that Mst. Sardaran Bibi respondent No. 2, the widowed mother of Mst: Seeman, the prosecu trix had illicit relations with Abdul Majeed respondent No. 1. About eight days prior to the registration of the present case, Abdul Majeed subjected the prosecutrix to Zina-bil-Jabr with the aid and abetment of Mst. Sardaran. On raising alarm, Barkat Ali and Muhammad Ismail were attracted to the scene of occurrence. Subsequently, the prosecutrix out of fear did not report the matter to the police for about eight days and thereafter, in the company of her paternal uncle she got herself medically examined and lodged a report.

4. While allowing bail, through the impugned order to the respon dents, the learned Additional. Sessions Judge, Jhang, observed that it did not sound the reason that respondent No. 2, the real mother of the pro secutrix would force her daughter to be subjected to Zina-bil-Jabr by her own paramour. He also observed that the delay of eight days in lodging the F. I. R. was not explained. He noticed that Barkat Ali, the paternal uncle of the prosecutrix was alleged to have been attracted to the scene of occurrence on her raising alarm but no explanation was forthcoming as to why he kept silent for more than a week. He thus considered it to be a ease of further inquiry.

5. It has been vehemently argued on behalf of the prosecutrix that respondents were guilty of a heinous crime which fell within prohibitory clause inasmuch as they subjected the prosecutrix, a girl aged 15 years to Zina-bil-Jabr. Some affidavits purporting to have been sworn by the father and brother of respondent No. 2 and other respectables of the locality have also been produced through Criminal Miscellaneous No. 370 M-83. It is alleged in these affidavits that the respondents confessed their guilt before the Panchait. It has also been argued on behalf of the peti tioner that according to the medico-legal report, it was established that the prosecutrix was subjected to rape.

6. As regards the affidavits, it my be observed that in the F. I. R., there is no mention to the effect that the respondents after the occurrence confessed their guilt before Panchait in the village or that some Panchait was convened in this connection. So far as medical evidence is concerned, it has been noticed that the prosecutrix is opined to be used to sexual inter course inasmuch as her vagina admits two fingers easily. Before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, she stated that on earlier occasions a well she was subjected to Zina by respondent No. 1 but she did not protest on such occasions. It has also come on record that respondent No. 2 has filed a complaint against Ashraf Ali, the son of Barkat Ali for having committed rape upon her daughter Mst. Seeman, the prosecutrix and that counter-case is also pending. Bashir, the brother of Mst. Seeman ha ,t sworn affidavit about the innocence of the respondents. In the above circumstances, no exception can be taken to the conclusion arrived at b the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jhang, to the effect that this was case of further inquiry within the meaning of section 497 (2) of the Code o Criminal Procedure.

7. In this view of the matter, the under consideration application fort cancellation of respondents' bail is dismissed.

Petition dismissed.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.