Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: MUHAMMAD ASLAM VS Respondent: THE STATEHonorable Justice Bashir A. MujahidMalik Muhammad Imtiaz Mahal,Ch. Muhammad Hafiz Rafique
2004 Y L R 1297
2004 Y L R 1297
[Lahore]
Before Bashir A. Mujahid, J
MUHAMMAD ASLAM‑‑‑Petitioner
Versus
THE STATE ‑‑Respondent
Criminal Miscellaneous No.5589‑B of 2003, decided on 22nd October, 2003.
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑--
‑‑‑‑S.497‑‑‑Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), S.16‑‑ Bail, grant of‑‑‑High Court had dismissed the bail application moved by the accused earlier on merits ‑‑‑Abductee, the star witness in the case, had now been murdered and her statement under S.164, Cr. P. C. was not recorded‑‑‑No chance for conviction of the accused in the circumstances if trial subsisted‑‑‑Bail could not be withheld as punishment‑Case of accused had become that of further inquiry‑‑‑Accused was no more required for investigation‑‑‑Bail was allowed to accused accordingly.
Malik Muhammad Imtiaz Mahal for Petitioner.
Ch. Muhammad Hafiz Rafique for the State.
ORDER
Muhammad Aslam seeks after arrest bail in case F.I.R. No. 51 dated 5‑3‑2003 under section 16 of Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979 registered with Police Station, Bhera District Sargodha at the instance of Umar Hayat.
2. The petitioner earlier moved this Court through Criminal Miscellaneous No.4097‑B of 2003 for grant of after arrest bail which was declined by this Court on 31‑7‑2003. He has repeated this petition on the ground that no statement of the alleged abductee was recorded under section 164, Cr.P.C. after her recovery and now she has been murdered on 25‑8‑2003 and in this regard case has already been registered vide F.I.R. No.155 at Police Station, Phulrwan District, Sargodha at the instance of Muhammad Munir Ahmad, complainant, therefore, after death of Shamim, who was star witness of the case, there is no chance for conviction of the petitioner after trial, so, he be enlarged on bail.
3. The petition has been opposed by the learned counsel for the State.
4. Heard. Record perused.
5. Although the petitioner was declined after arrest bail by this Court on merits, but in absence of star prosecution witness i.e. Shamim Akhtar, who has admittedly been murdered, there is no chance for conviction of the petitioner after trial. It is settled law that bail cannot be withheld as punishment. Petitioner has placed on record copy of F.I.R, No.155 dated 25‑7‑2003 registered at Police Station Phulrwan, and in absence of statement of Shamim Akhtar, under section 164, Cr.P.C., the case of the petitioner becomes that of further inquiry. He is no more required for investigation, therefore, he is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing of bail bonds in the sum of Rs.50,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court.
N.H.Q./M‑39/L Bail allowed.