1. ' This bail application has been moved by applicant Hasnain Ali son of Ali Nawaz and Abid Hussain son of Moula Bakhsh against whom case has been registered vide F.I.R. No,48 of 2004 at P.S. Bhiria City, District Naushero Feroze, under sections 354-A, 504, 34, P.P.C.
2. ' Brief facts for the purpose of disposing of the bail application can be summarized as that on 18-5- 2004 one Sultan Ahmed father of the victim, namely, Mst. Shagufta lodged report at P.S. Bhiria Road, wherein he stated that his daughter, namely, Mst. Shagufta, who is a student of ninth class, while waiting to catch conveyance at Musafir Khana near railway crossing to return home from school at about 2-15. She found her uncle, wrongly mentioned as uncle, he is the grandfather of the victim, namely, Muhammad Ismail and Ghulam Hussain were also there. She noted that two persons took her photograph, which she pointed out to her uncle Muhammad Ismail who identified the said persons as the applicants and when Muhammad Ismail admonished them, they got infuriated and took out the veil of Mst. Shagufta and tore her clothes, moreover, they also gave kicks and fists blows to her uncle Muhammad Ismail. It appears that initially police registered the case under section 354, P.P.C., but subsequently added section 354-A, P.P.C.
3. ' Heard Mr. Imdad Ali Awan, learned counsel for the applicants and Mr. Zubair Ahmed Rajput on behalf of the State.
4. ' The learned counsel tor the applicants argued that section 354-A, P.P.C. Does not attract in the circumstances of this case and police with mala fide intention added said section. The learned counsel read over the F.I.R. And stated that the only allegations made in the F.I.R. Against the applicants are that the applicants removed her veil, tore the clothes of Mst. Shagufta. He argued that preconditions for attracting section 354-A, P.P.C. Are that the clothes from the body of the woman should be completely removed, making her nude before the general public. The learned counsel in support of his contention relied upon the cases of Abdul Latif and another v. The State 1991 PCr.LJ 194 and Mst. Abida Jabeen v. Imtiaz Ahmed and others 1997 PCr.LJ 600.
5. ' The learned counsel further drew my attention to the affidavits sworn by complainant Sultan Ahmed, Muhammad Ismail, grandfather of victim who was one of the eye-witnesses as well as victim Mst. Shagufta. In the said affidavits they stated that they have not disclosed the names of the applicants or anyone else while lodging the F.I.R. As they have not identified the persons involved who were riding the motorcycle at the time of incident ' On the other hand, while rebutting the arguments of the learned counsel for the applicants, Mr. Zubair Ahmed Rajput, the learned counsel for the State, argued that the affidavits sworn by the complainant, victim and eye-witnesses have no value in the eye of law as the same have been obtained by the applicants after filing of the bail application. He further argued that the shirt of the victim was stripped about 6" from the front side and there are six P.Ws., whose names have been given in the challan.
6. ' I have taken into consideration respective arguments advanced by the learned Advocates for the parties. The complainant in F.I.R. Has stated that:-- "my uncle asked them (applicants) not to misbehave with the woman on which they used vulgar language with each other, and both the accused persons snatched away my veil and clothes, which was torn, and both the accused persons, caused kicks and fists blows to me and my uncle Muhammad Ismail .... I am approaching and complaining that above both the accused persons in furtherance of their common intention, removed the veil from the face of my daughter; and also tore the clothes too, on the spot and they have committed a misbehaviour and also caused kicks, and fists blows to my brother and has also abused him."
7. ' From the perusal of the contents of the F.I.R. It appears that no specific allegation has been made that the applicants have used assault or criminal force against the victim and not only stripped of her clothes, but also in such condition exposed her to the public view which are the preconditions for bringing the offence within the mischief of section 354-A, P.P.C.
8. ' In the case of Abdul Latif and another (supra), relied upon by the learned counsel for the applicants, the learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court held that in order to attract section 354-A, P.P.C. Three , following conditions must be fulfilled:-- (i)assault with criminal force to a woman; (ii)stripping her of her clothes; and (iii)exposing her to the public view in that condition.
9. ' It was further held that conditions regarding stripping of a woman of her clothes is fulfilled when the clothes are completely removed, making her naked. If in this naked condition she is exposed to public view, then the third condition is satisfied (underlines - are mine).
10. ' In the case of Mst. Abida Jabeen (supra), the learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court while relying upon the case of Abdul Latif (supra), held that words "strips her of her clothes and in that condition exposes her to the public view" are very important words and this section applies Only in those cases where after stripping off the clothes the lady is made naked and exposed to the public view.
11. ' I have gone through the above - referred two judgments, and with profound respect to the learned Judges and all humility at my command disagree with the view that in order to attract section 354-A, P.P.C. Clothes of the woman are to be completely removed making her nude.
12. ' The word "strip" has been defined in the Chamber Dictionary as under:-- "Strip, vt. To pull; pee; or tear off; to doff; to divest; to undress; to reduce to the ranks; to deprive of a covering; to skin; to peel; to husk; to lay bare; expose; to deprive; in clear; empty; to dismantle; to clear of fruit; leaves; stems; midribs; or any other part; to press out the last milk from (a cow, etc.) or obtain milk in this way; to press out the roe or milt from; to handle as if way; making a cow; to cut in strips; to put strips on; outstrip; press (obs); to remove a constituent from a substance by building; distillation; etc. (chem.); to break the threat of (a unload (esp. a container or lorry). Vi. To undress; to perform a striptease; (of a screw) to be stripped of the threat; to come off; to go swiftly (obs)-"
13. ' The New Oxford Illustrated Dictionary defined 'strip' as: ' Long narrow piece or tract (of textile material land. Paper, etc.)
14. ' Long narrow portion, usu. Of uniform width, on surface, differing in colour or textile from adjacent parts narrow strip of cloth braid, etc. ' In my humbie view the intention of the Legislature while incorporating section 354-A, P.P.C. By Criminal Procedure (Amendment) Ordinance, XXIV of 1984 is that no woman should be assaulted by using criminal force and stripping her of her-clothes and in such position, exposed to the public view. Section 354-A, P.P.C. Has been incorporated to protect the modesty and honour of the woman and if anyone exposes her for public view in way in which no woman would like to appear in public by stripping her clothes such person is liable to be prosecuted under section 354-A, P.P.C.
15. It is not necessary that woman should be completely nude to attract section 354-A, P.P.C. If substantial part of her clothes has been torn in such a way that the same exposes her body and the woman has been exposed in such humiliation for the view in general public so as to humiliate her in that condition the requirement to attract under section 354-A, P.P.C. Has been satisfied.
16. ' The word "and" appears before the words "the that condition exposes her to the public view" has great significance, and same has to be read in connection with early sentence "strips her of her clothes". In B my humble view if we read it together, then it means that a persons strips off the clothes of a woman and compels her to view her in such condition to the public.
17. ' If it is accepted that.Section 354, P.P.C. Will be attracted only, in case, where the clothes of a woman have been completely removed, making her nude for the view of public, then same, would lead to the absurdity and defeat of the very object for which same was incorporated. It is the basic principle of interpretation of statutes that statute should be interpreted in such a way that it should advance the remedy and suppress the mischief.
18. ' Keeping in view what is stated hereinabove, it appears that since no allegation has been levelled in the F.I.R. That the applicant has assaulted the victim Shagufta and stripped her of her clothes and in that condition exposed her to the public view. One of the conditions under section 354-A, P.P.C. Is that not only the accused has assaulted or used criminal force to strip her of her, clothes, but also they in that condition exposed her to public view. In my tentative view, section 354-A, P.P.C.
19. Is not attracted in the instant case.
20. ' At the time of considering bail application it is by now well-settled that the Court has not to examine the evidence in detail. However, in the instant case as the affidavits of the victim, complainant and her grandfather, who was present at the spot, are on record, which show that they have not identified the accused persons. I am of the view that the applicants have made out a case for further inquiry under section 497(2), Cr.P.C. And as such they were granted bail by a short order, dated 8-7-2004 and there are reasons for the same.
21. ' I would like to make it clear that the observations made hereinabove are tentative assessment and will not affect in any manner the findings to be recorded at the time of final hearing and the trial Court should decide the matter without prejudice to it. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.