📝 AI Summary — Plain-Language Overview
This case involved a pre-arrest bail petition before the Lahore High Court. Muhammad Hanif was accused of abducting a woman, Mst. Zubaida Bibi, for the purpose of illicit intercourse and of committing rape, along with stealing cash and gold ornaments, under Section 365-B PPC. The complainant filed the FIR nearly two months after the alleged occurrence.
The petitioner argued that the complainant was actually his relative who had voluntarily married him according to Islamic law on the same date as the alleged abduction, and produced a Nikah Nama as proof. He also showed that the complainant had appeared with him before a sessions court shortly after the alleged incident, that a union council official had certified their marriage, and that he had obtained a court decree for restitution of conjugal rights. The complainant, however, denied the marriage and had filed a separate suit disputing it.
The court found the unexplained two-month delay in filing the FIR suspicious, especially since no family member reported the incident immediately. Given the existing dispute over the authenticity of the marriage and the circumstances suggesting the allegations may not be genuine, the court held that the case against the petitioner was doubtful. Since an accused is entitled to the benefit of doubt even at the bail stage, the court granted him bail. This case illustrates how delay in reporting a crime, combined with conflicting evidence, can support a bail grant.
یہ مقدمہ لاہور ہائی کورٹ کے سامنے دائر ایک ضمانت قبل از گرفتاری کی درخواست سے متعلق تھا۔ محمد حنیف پر الزام تھا کہ اس نے مستورہ زبیدہ بی بی کو زنا بالجبر کی غرض سے اغوا کیا، اس کے ساتھ زنا بالجبر کا ارتکاب کیا، اور نقدی و سونے کے زیورات بھی چوری کیے، جس پر تعزیرات پاکستان کی دفعہ 365-B کے تحت مقدمہ درج کیا گیا۔ مدعیہ نے مذکورہ واقعے کے تقریباً دو ماہ بعد ایف آئی آر درج کرائی تھی۔
درخواست گزار کا موقف تھا کہ مدعیہ درحقیقت اس کی رشتہ دار ہے جس نے اسلامی قانون کے مطابق اسی تاریخ کو اپنی مرضی سے اس کے ساتھ نکاح کیا تھا جس دن مبینہ اغوا ظاہر کیا گیا، اور اس نے ثبوت کے طور پر نکاح نامہ پیش کیا۔ اس نے یہ بھی دکھایا کہ مدعیہ مذکورہ واقعے کے کچھ ہی عرصہ بعد اس کے ساتھ سیشن کورٹ میں پیش ہوئی تھی، یونین کونسل کے ایک اہلکار نے ان کے نکاح کی تصدیق کی تھ
Generated from the full judgment text below — not a substitute for reading the actual opinion.
PLJ 2011 Cr.C . ( Lahore ) 269 Present: Sh . Ahmad Farooq , J. MUHAMMAD HANIF--Petitioner versus STATE etc.--Respondents Crl . Misc. No. 6923-B of 2010, decided on 4.8.2010. Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 (V of 1898)-- ----S. 497--Pakistan Penal Code, (XLV of 1860), S. 365--Bail, grant of--Un-explained delay--Allegation of--Petitioner alongwith co-accused abducted complainant committing illicit intercourse--Litigation regarding genuineness of " Nikah Nama "--Benefit of doubt was given to accused--Petitioner had on record a copy of Nikah Nama --Complainant filed application u/S. 22-A and 22-B Cr.P.C . not only complainant presence had been marked but thumb impression was affixed--Secretary union council had issued certificate on complainant marriage and petitioner had obtained an ex- parte decree restitution of conjugal right against complainant but complainant had instituted a suit for jactitation of marriage against present petitioner. [P. 271] A Mr. Nasir Ahmad Awan , Advocate with Petitioner. Mr. Muhammad Iqbal Chaudhry , DPG, for State. Ch. Arshad Iqbal Bhullar , Advocate, with Complainant. Date of hearing: 4.8.2010. Order The petitioner/Muhammad Hanif seeks pre-arrest bail in a case arising out of FIR No. 298/2010, dated 1.5.2010, registered in Police Station Arifwala , District Pakpattan Sharif , under Section 365-B PPC.
2. Succinctly, the allegation against the present petitioner leveled by the complainant/ Mst . Zubaida Bibi , in the FIR, is that on 4.3.2010, at about 10.30 a .m. , the said petitioner alongwith the co-accused abducted her for the purpose of committing illicit intercourse. The accused are also alleged to have stolen Rs 20,000/- and gold ornaments weighing 5 tolas . The complainant further alleged that the present petitioner had been committing rape with her and got her thumb impression on blank papers.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there is a delay of about two months in the registration of the case as the occurrence took place on 4.3.2010 and the FIR was lodged on 1.5.2010. He further submitted that the complainant, who is not only a maternal cousin of the petitioner but also, being major and sui-juris , contracted valid marriage with the petitioner according to Sharia Muhammadi , out of her free will, vide " Nikah Nama " dated 4.3.2010. He maintained that Mst . Zubaida Bibi /complainant alongwith the petitioner filed an application under Sections 22-A. and 22-B Cr.P.C . in the Sessions Court, Lahore, wherein she appeared alongwith the petitioner and put her thumb impression on the order sheet dated 10.3.2010. He pointed out that the petitioner has also obtained an ex- parte decree for restitution of conjugal rights against the present complainant on 11.6.2010. He argued that the allegation of the commission of the alleged offence against the present petitioner is totally false and the petitioner has been implicated by the complainant with mala fide intentions under the undue pressure of her parents.
4. Conversely, the learned counsel for the complainant as well as the learned DPG opposed the instant petition on the ground that the victim has herself lodged the instant FIR and she has also fully supported her allegation in the statement recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C . They further submitted that the complainant/ Mst . Zubaida Bibi has filed a suit for jactitation of marriage. Lastly, they argued that the punishment of the offences, alleged to have been committed by the present petitioner, falls within the prohibitory clause of Section 497(1) Cr.P.C .
5. Argument heard. Record perused.
6. Mst . Zubaida Bibi /complainant was allegedly abducted on 4.3.2010, whereas the petitioner has placed on record a copy of " Nikah Nama ", which shows that the Nikah of said Mst . Zubaida Bibi was solemnized with the petitioner on 4.3.2010. It is strange that neither the parents nor any relative of Mst . Zubaida Bibi lodged an FIR immediately after the occurrence on 4.3.2010 and the FIR was lodged by Mst . Zubaida Bibi herself on 1.5.2010, after her alleged escape from the custody of the petitioner. Mst . Zubaida Bibi /complainant alongwith Muhammad Hanif /present petitioner filed an application under Sections 22-A and 22-B Cr.P.C . against SHO, Police Station, Purani Anarkali , Lahore, wherein not only her presence has been marked but also her thumb impression is affixed on the order sheet dated 10.3.2010 of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Lahore.
7. Furthermore, Secretary, Union Council, Guldusht Colony (6), District Lahore, has issued a certificate on 28.5.2010 regarding the marriage of Mst . Zubaida Bibi with Muhammad Hanif on 4.3.2010. Additionally, not only the present petitioner has obtained an ex- parte decree for restitution of conjugal rights against Mst . Zubaida Bibi /complainant but also the said Mst . Zubaida Bibi has instituted a suit for jactitation of marriage against the present petitioner. The petitioner and the alleged victim are closely related to each other. In these circumstances, particularly, the litigation regarding genuineness of " Nikah Nama " dated 4.3.2010, the commission of the alleged offences by the present petitioner is doubtful. Needless to mention here that the benefit of doubt is to be given to an accused even at bail stage. Hence, the instant pre-arrest bail petition, filed by Muhammad Hanif , is accepted and interim bail already granted to him is confirmed, subject to submission of fresh bail bonds in the sum of Rs . 1,00,000/-, with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court. (S.L.) Bail granted.