ORDER M. BILAL KHAN, J. - Abdul Razzaq alias Bhola son of Muhammad Abbas, the petitioner, by filing this petition, seeks post-arrest bail in 'case F.I.R. No. 90/2007, dated 1.3.2007 registered with Police Station Changa Manga, District Kasur for offences under Sections 376, 511, P.P.C.
2. The prosecution case as it unfolded in the F.I.R. Registered at the instance of Liaquat Ali son of Rehmat Ali, the complainant, was that he is a resident of Chak No. 17; on the day of occurrence at 8.00 a.m. When his daughter Mst. Zunaira Kausar had gone out of her house to dispose of garbage, one Bhola son of Muhammad Abbas (petitioner) came over there, removed her veil and started kissing and hugging her publicly; on noise raised by her the accused started dragging her towards an Ahata and by using force tore the string of her shalwar; in the meantime the witnesses got attracted to the spot and witnessed the .Occurrence. Resultantly the instant F.I.R. Had been recorded.
3. The petitioner was arrested .On 2.3.2007 and is in custody ever since. His plea for post-arrest bail did not find favour with the learned Additional Sessions. judges Chunian, who dismissed his application vide order dated 31.5.2007. Hence this petition.
4. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and examining the record it has been noticed that the petitioner has duly been nominated in the F.I.R. Which had been chalked out on the basis of an application made to SHO, Police Station Chhanga Manga on the day of occurrence i.$.
25.2.2007. However the .Police registered the formal F.I.R. On 1.3.2007 after three clays which delay obviously cannot be attributed to the complainant. There is a very serious allegation against the petitioner of outraging .The modesty of a young girl of 15 years of age who is a student of class-VIII.
The girl alongwith her father (complainant) was. Present during the course of hearing. She tearfully narrated the depraved and atrocious manner in which she had been dealt with by the petitioner.
The. Visibility distraught complainant stated before the Court that the only reason that his daughter has been molested is that the petitioner had taken it for granted that since the former belongs to a menial, low-status caste, he would never pick up the courage to challenge his beastly act. The learned counsel for the petitioner has not been able to point out any malice or rancour which might have been harboured by the complainant for involving the petitioner in a serious case in which the latter himself runs the risk of stigmatizing his own daughter. The contention of the learned counsel that the F.I.R. Is politically motivated, is also without any substance, inasmuch as the complainant happens 'to be a lowly-paid primary school teacher having no involvement in politics. The further contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that as the victim was wearing a BURQA it was not possible for the petitioner to have torn the string of her shalwar, is also not tenable, in that it has never been the case of the prosecution that the girl was wearing a BURQA. The assertion in the F.I.R. As also in the statement of the victim under Section 161, Cr.P.C. Has been that she was wearing a facial veil. At any rate, it is not for this Court to go in the intricacies of the case at this stage, suffice it to say that ample incriminating material is available against the .Petitioner to Drima facie connect him. With the alleged offence. The affidavits of Habib Ullah and Muhammad Yaseen, eye-witnesses, wherein they have denied to have seen the occurrence, also do not advance the petitioner's case for the grant of bail, inasmuch as the statement of the prosecutrix, sufficiently incriminates the petitioner. The precedents relied upon by the learned counsel for the petitioner 7. e. Ali Asghar, etc. v. The State (NLR 1988 Criminal 71), Dinu alias Din Muhammad v. The State (NLR. 1988 Criminal 159), Sharif and others v. The State (1999 P.Cr.L.J. 871), Muhammad Faruq v. The State (2.000 P.Cr.L.J. 1791 ((Lahore) Muhammad Naveed Iqbal v. The State and another (2001 P.Cr.L.J. 1930 (Peshawar), Tahir Abbas alias Babar Ali (2001 MLD 1559), and Atta Muhammad v. State (PLJ 2007 Cr.C. (Lahore) 75), are not applicable to the case of the petitioner as they proceed on distinguishable facts. Each criminal has to proceed on its own merits. There is no merit in this petition which is accordingly dismissed. .