Muhammad Shehzad, the petitioner seeks the grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No, 560/2014 dated 7.8.2014 registered under Section 376-(1) of PPC at Police Station City Lodhran, District Lodhran.
2. As per the FIR, Muhammad Shakir co-accused and the petitioner committed rape upons is Mst.
Rukhsana Bibi, the complainant on 7.8.2014.
3. Arguments heard. Record perused.
4. I am struck by the fact that the alleged occurrence took place on the night between 07/08.08.2014, while the same is said to have been reported to the police in the morning at 08:30 a.m. In other words, FIR was got recorded prior to the happening of the event. The story narrated in the FIR is improbable. The victim/complainant present in the Court has stated that she had a dispute with the petitioner and co-accused over the fare to be collected by them. It is pertinent to mention that the petitioner is said to be a Driver of a wagon, while co-accused. Shakir is a Conductor. It does not appeal to reason that the accused would commit rape upon a woman just for her not paying the fare. The complainant is said to be in the habit of lodging FIR(s). Earlier, she lodged FIR No, 256/2013 dated 4.5.2013 under Sections 376 and 511, PPC against her former husband.
After a thorough inquiry, the allegation levelled by her was found to be false, and the case was cancelled.
5. Muhammad Shakir, the co-accused was admitted to post-arrest bail on the above grounds by the order date 08.12.2014 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No, 61010-B/2014. No doubt, the petitioner is seeking extraordinary relief of pre-arrest bail, but when the prosecution story is riddled with holes and doubts, the same is to be resolved in favour of the accused even at the bail stage.
To state the obvious it was an un-witnessed occurrence. The complainant has not even got recorded the statement of her husband in order to lend credence to the various claims made by her in the FIR. The medico-legal report of the victim does not reveal anything for the reason that the complainant is a married woman, rather it negates her version that she was subjected to illicit intercourse forcibly by the accused on the floor of the wagon. Had it been so, there would have been some marks of violence on her body, which were conspicuous by their absence in the medico-legal certificate.
6. Since, there are sufficient grounds calling for further inquiry into the guilt of the accused.
Consequently, the ad interim pre-arrest bail granted to the petitioner by the order dated 15.12.2014 is hereby confirmed, subject to his furnishing bail/surety bond in sum of Rs,2,00,000/- (Rupees Two Hundred Thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.