' Muhammad Asghar petitioner has moved this application for the recovery of Ghulam Akbar, Ghulam Shabbir sons of Malik Muhammad Wazir, Muhammad Safdar, Zafar Iqbal son of Ghulam Rasool detenus who, according to the contents of the application, were being improperly detained at Police Station Alpa, District Multan. It was further stated in the application that the detenus were apprehended in between the night of 8/9-10-2001 at about 3-00 a.m. And were taken to the police station although at that time no case was registered against them. It has further been stated that previously a writ petition had been filed by Muhammad Safdar detenu wherein he has alleged that the respondent S.H.O. Had been harassing him unnecessarily and at that time he was not involved in any case.
2. The detenus were produced before this Court. The bailiff has also submitted a detailed report according to which the arrest of the detenus was shown at 11-00 a.m. On 9-10-2001 in case F.I.R. No, 257 of 2001 registered under sections 452/354/506(ii)/ 148/149, P.P.C. According to the report the names of the detenues were mentioned in the F.I.R. And their arrest had also been shown in the case diary as well as in the daily diary. According to the report of the bailiff the detenus stated before him that they were arrested at about 3-00 a.m. On 9-10-2001 and were subjected to torture by the -police officials.
3. The S.H.O. Police Station, Alpa, District Multan along with Mukhtar Hussain, A.S.I. Who registered the F.I.R.. Are present in the Court. They deny the allegation of torturing the detenus and stated that the detenus were in fact arrested at about 11-00 a.m. On 9-10-2001.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the respondents who are present in person and have perused the report of the bailiff and contents of the F.I.R. It has been admitted that none of the alleged injured' P.Ws. Were got medically examined. All the offences mentioned in the F.I.R. Do not attract the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. Admittedly, there is a background of hostility between the detenus and the police. In these circumstances I convert this petition into bail application and admit the detenus to bail subject to their furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs, 10,000 (Rupees ten thousand only) each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Deputy Registrar (Judi.) of this Court.
2002 Y L, R 173 [Lahore] Before Muhammad Farrukh Mahmud, J MUHAMMAD IMRAN ---Petitioner versus THE STATE---Respondent Criminal Miscellaneous Nos. 2268-B and 1 of 2001, decided on 10th October, 2001.
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)- ----S.497---Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 19794, Ss. 13/14---Bail, grant of---No warrant of arrest was obtained by the complainant Police Officer and he conducted the raid in violation of Fundamental Rights guaranteed by the Constitution---First Information. Report had nowhere mentioned that the apprehended lady and the male were committing Zina---No offence prima facie was made out against the accused under Ss.13/14 of Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979 and further probe was needed into the guilt of the accused---Bail was granted to the accused., 1741 A Faiz Bakhsh Khan Langah for Petitioner.
Muhammad Tariq Mehmood for the State.
' Muhammad Imran petitioner has sought his post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No, 210 of 2001 registered on 28-8-2001 at Police Station Kot Sultan, District Layyah, for offences under sections 13/14 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979.
2. A perusal of the F.I.R. Shows, that the complainant Ghulam Abbas, A.S.I. Received an information that a prostitution den was being run by one Nisar Hussain and, therefore, the complainant formed a raiding party and conducted the raid. During the raid the complainant found one lady and a person lying together on a cot who were apprehended by the complainant. It is further stated in the F.I.R. That on inquiry the apprehended persons disclosed their names as Muhammad Imran and Mst. Nasim Mai. The petitioner, after his arrest is in the judicial lock-up.
3. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned counsel for the State and have perused the record. It has been noticed that no warrant of arrest was obtained by the complainant and he conducted the raid in violation of the Fundamental Rights guaranteed by the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973. It is A nowhere mentioned in the F.I.R. That the apprehended lady and the male were committing zina. In these circumstances, prima facie, no offence is made out under sections 13/14 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood)
Ordinance, 1979 and further probe is needed into the guilt of the petitioner.
4. In these circumstances I am inclined to release the petitioner on bail subject to his furnishing of bail bond in the sum of Rs, 5,000 (Rupees five thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court.