لاھور ھائیکورٹ نے غیرت کے نام پر بھین کا قتل کرنے والے بھائی کی ضمانت وارثوں کے معاف کر دینے کے باوجود مسترد کر دی۔ Crl. Misc. No. 47663-B of 2024

والدین نے بلال سکندر کو معاف کر دیا تھا۔

، مقدمے میں یہ بھی ذکر ہے کہ مقتولہ کے والدین نے بلال سکندر کو معاف کر دیا تھا اور صلح کی بات کی تھی۔ تاہم، عدالت نے اس پر غور کرتے ہوئے کہا کہ "غیرت" کے نام پر قتل کے کیسز میں قانونی ترامیم کے تحت، معافی یا صلح کے باوجود ملزم کو ضمانت پر رہائی نہیں دی جا سکتی۔

پاکستان کے قانون کے مطابق، غیرت کے نام پر کیے جانے والے قتل کو "قتل عمد" نہیں سمجھا جاتا،

پاکستان کے قانون کے مطابق، غیرت کے نام پر کیے جانے والے قتل کو "قتل عمد" نہیں سمجھا جاتا، اور اس کے لیے خصوصی سزائیں مقرر کی گئی ہیں۔ عدالت نے اس معاملے میں ملزم کی ضمانت درخواست مسترد کر دی کیونکہ معافی یا صلح کے باوجود، قانونی ترامیم کی وجہ سے ملزم کو عمر قید یا موت کی سزا ہو سکتی ہے۔

سکندر پر الزام ہے کہ اس نے اپنی بہن رمشا کو غیرت کے نام پر قتل کر دیا۔

مقدمہ میں بلال سکندر پر الزام ہے کہ اس نے اپنی بہن رمشا کو غیرت کے نام پر قتل کر دیا۔ الزام یہ ہے کہ بلال نے اپنی بہن کو دھمکی دی تھی کہ اس نے خاندان کو ذلیل کیا ہے، اور پھر اس پر سیدھا فائرنگ کر دی جس سے رمشا موقع پر ہی ہلاک ہو گئی۔۔

پولیس کے مطابق، جب وہ رمشا کے گھر کے قریب پہنچے، تو انہوں نے دیکھا کہ بلال نے رمشا پر گولی چلائی تھی۔

یہ واقعہ 2 فروری 2024 کو دن کے 12:30 بجے ہوا۔ پولیس کے مطابق، جب وہ رمشا کے گھر کے قریب پہنچے، تو انہوں نے دیکھا کہ بلال نے رمشا پر گولی چلائی تھی۔ بلال پانچ ماہ تک قانون کی نظروں سے اوجھل رہا، اور جب پکڑا گیا تو اس کے پاس سے اسلحہ برآمد ہوا۔

مقدمے میں یہ بھی شامل ہے کہ بلال کے خلاف کافی شواہد موجود ہیں، جیسے کہ فائرنگ کی گولی اور اسلحہ، جو کہ ملزم کو جرم سے منسلک کرتے ہیں۔ اس کے علاوہ، عدالت نے اس بات پر بھی توجہ دی کہ مقدمے میں "غیرت" کے نام پر قتل کے کیس میں ضمانت پر رہائی کی درخواستوں کو سختی سے دیکھا جاتا ہے، کیونکہ ان معاملات میں قانون اور اسلامی تعلیمات کی خلاف ورزی ہوتی ہے۔

Must read judgement

ORDER SHEET

IN THE

LAHORE HIGH COURT LAHORE

(JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT)

Case No.

Crl. Misc. No. 47663-B of 2024

Bilal Sikandar

Versus

The State and another

Sr. No. of order/

Proceedings

Date of order/

Proceedings

Order with signatures of Judge, and that of parties or

counsel, where necessary.

21.08.2024

Mr. Mushtaq Ahmad Mohal, Advocate for the

petitioner.

Miss Rashida Parveen, Assistant District Public

Prosecutor with Junaid, SI.

After dismissal of his post-arrest bail petition by

learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sargodha, vide order

dated 07.03.2024, Bilal Sikandar, accused/petitioner has

filed instant petition under section 497 of the Code of

Criminal Procedure, 1898 (Cr.P.C.) seeking post-arrest

bail in case F.I.R. No.99 of 2024 dated 02.02.2024

registered at Police Station Bhagtanwala District

Sargodha for the offences under sections 302, 311 of the

Pakistan Penal Code, 1860 (PPC).

Allegation, in a nutshell, against the

accused/petitioner is that he, by exhorting that Ramsha

(his sister) has brought dishonour to them and he would

not leave her alive, made a straight fire shot hitting on the

back of Ramsha, who succumbed to the injury at the spot.

Heard. Record perused.

Instant is a case in which Ramsha (aged about

21/22 years) lost her life in the consequence of a fire shot

injury alleged to have been made on her by none other

than her real brother, on account of ‘ghairat’. The

occurrence that took place on 02.02.2024 at 12:30 PM

was claimed to have been witnessed by Muhammad

Junaid Ahmed, T/SI and the constables who, during the

course of patrolling, when reached near the house of

deceased, rushed inside the house on hearing an uproar

Crl. Misc. No.47663-B-2024

coming inside the house. According to them,

accused/petitioner who was armed with 12-bore single

barrel, made straight fire shot hitting on the person of

Ramsha who fell down and succumbed to the injury at the

spot. Strangely enough, none of the inmates, including the

parents of the deceased, opted to become the complainant

qua the incidence in which their own daughter was done

to death, and even they did not give their account

regarding the murder of the deceased

immediately, just

after the occurrence that how and under which

circumstances Ramsha became injured and lost her life.

Occurrence has been shown to be witnessed by the

independent persons belonging to the police department

who, ex facie, have no ill-will or any sort of grudge to

falsely involve the accused/petitioner with the

commission of murder of his own sister. Even, the

accused/petitioner remained fugitive from law for the

period of around 5 months and when finally rounded up,

got recovered the firearm. The investigator also collected

a crime empty from the spot and the same was sent to the

office of PFSA. The firearm recovered from the

accused/petitioner has also been dispatched to the

concerned quarter for analysis. The police/investigator

seemed to have collected sufficient evidence/material

linking the accused/petitioner with the commission of

alleged crime.

Issue of honour killing had been noticed by

courts with grave concern and in case “Muhammad Akram

Khan v. The State” (PLD 2001 SC 96), while answering

stance taken by defence that accused committed offence

under the impulse of ‘ghairat’, the Supreme Court of

Pakistan observed as under: -

“Legally and morally speaking, nobody has

any right nor can anybody be allowed to take

Crl. Misc. No.47663-B-2024

law in his own hands to take the life of

anybody in the name of “Ghairat”. Neither the

law of the land nor religion permits so-called

honour killing which amounts to murder (Qatli-Amd) simpliciter. Such iniquitous and vile act

is violative of fundamental right as enshrined

in Article 9 of the Constitution of Islamic

Republic of Pakistan which provides that no

person would be deprived of life or liberty

except in accordance with law and any custom

or usage in that respect is void under Article

8(1) of the Constitution. In this case, the plea

of “Ghairat” cannot be deemed to be a

mitigating circumstance as the motive was not

directly against the deceased.”

In case “Umer Din v. The State and others” (2017 YLR

Note 378 [Lahore]), while dealing with the case of

post-arrest bail of an accused relating to honour killing,

this Court observed as under: -

“8. It is important to observe that in our

society granting post-arrest bails in ‘honor

killing’ i.e. a violence against women will

substantially increase such incidents, which

in most of the cases is for gain of the

property, demanding the hand of a woman

of choice, settling the old scores and

personal vendetta. Certainly, if such like act

as committed by the petitioner is approved,

it would lead to an anarchic situation in the

society and lynching of women would

become order of the day.”

In case “Khadim Hussain and another v. The State”

(PLD 2012 Baluchistan 179), while dealing with the

same moot point it was observed as under: -

“I have noticed in a number of cases that

the killing of innocent wife, sister and other

female relatives, on the allegation of

'siyahkari' has become a routine practice,

rather a fashion, and it is a high time to

discourage such kind of unwarranted and

shocking practice, resulting in double

murder in the name of so-called honour

killing. I am not impressed by the contention

of learned counsel for the applicants that

according to the prosecution's own showing,

Crl. Misc. No.47663-B-2024

the occurrence is the result of 'siyahkari', as

such the applicants were liable to be

enlarged on bail. It is true that people do not

swallow such kind of insult, touching the

honour of their womenfolk and usually

commit murder of alleged 'siyahkar' in order

to vindicate and rehabilitate the family

honour, but it is equally true that no one can

be granted licence to take law of the land in

his own hands and start executing the

culprits himself instead of taking them to the

Courts of law. The murder based on

`Ghairat' does not furnish a valid ground for

bail. Killing of innocent people, especially

women on the pretext of 'siyahkari', is

absolutely un-Islamic, illegal and

unconstitutional. It is worth mentioning that

the believers of Islam are not even allowed

to divorce them, without establishing their

accusation. We profess our love for Islam,

but ignore clear Qur'anic Injunctions

regarding the rights of women. The Holy

Qur'an in Sura XXIV in Sura (NUUR)

Verses 4 says:

"And those who launch a charge against

chaste women and produce not four

witnesses, (To support their allegation),---

Flog them with eight stripes; and reject their

evidence even after: for such men are

wicked transgressors;---"

In this regard, it would also be

advantageous to reproduce Hadith 837

Book 48 (Sahih Bukhari), which speaks as

under:--

"Narrated Ibn Abbas: Hilal bin Umaiya

accused his wife before the Prophet of

committing illegal sexual intercourse with

Sharik bin Sahma. The Prophet said,

"Produce a proof or else you would get the

legal punishment (by being lashed) on your

back" Hilal Said, "O Allah's Apostle! If any

one of us saw another man over his wife,

would he go to search for a proof" The

Prophet went on saying, "Produce a proof

or else you would get the legal punishment

(by being lashed) on your back " The

Prophet then mentioned the narration of

Lian (as in the Holy Book). (Surat-al-Nur..

24),

Crl. Misc. No.47663-B-2024

Being conscious of the fact that it had become an

ignominious practice in the society, particularly after

promulgation of Qisas and Diyat Ordinance, 2000, that

after doing away with females, either she may be a wife,

mother, daughter, or sister on the pretext of honour, real

perpetrators were usually being let off after getting pardon

from wali/walis, the legislature introduced certain

amendments through the Criminal Law (Amendment)

Act, 2004 (Act I of 2005), whereby the definition of an

offence committed in the name or on the pretext of the

honour was introduced. Similarly, clause (c) to section

302 of PPC was also amended and substituted through the

Criminal Law (Amendment) (Offences in the Name or on

Pretext of Honour) Act, 2016 as under: -

3. Amendment of section 302, Act XLV of

1860.—In the Penal Code, in section 302, in

clause (c), for the full stop at the end, a colon

shall be substituted and thereafter the

following proviso shall be added, namely:

“Provided that nothing in this clause apply to

the offence of Qatl-i-Amd if committed in the

name or on the pretext of honour and the same

shall fall within the ambit of clause (a) or

clause (b), as the case may be.”

In view of the above hinted amendment, an offence

committed in the name or on the pretext of honour was

excluded from the definition of ‘qatl-i-amd’ as contained

in Section 302 Clause (c) of PPC, as the phrase “in the

name or on the pretext of honour” inserted in the first

proviso to Section 302(c) of PPC clearly indicates that the

murder committed in the name or on the pretext of honour

had to be calculated as a murder committed with

premeditation in the background of honour. Reliance in

this regard may safely be placed on the case reported as

“Muhammad Qasim v. The State” (PLD 2018 SC 840).

Crl. Misc. No.47663-B-2024

Similarly, certain amendments were also made in Section

345 of Cr.P.C., introducing sub-section 2-A, and the same

reads as under:-

“(2-A) Where an offence under Chapter XVI

of the Pakistan Penal Code, 1860 (Act XLV of

1860), has been committed in the name or on

the pretext of karo kari, siyah kari or similar

other customs or practices, such offence may

be waived or compound subject to such

conditions as the Court may deem fit to

impose with the consent of the parties having

regard to the facts and circumstances of the

case.”

Similarly, as per provisions of sub-section (7) to Section

345 of Cr.PC, no offence shall be waived or compounded

save as provided by this Section and section 311 of PPC.

Another significant amendment has been introduced by

amending section 299 of PPC and introducing clause (ee)

through the Criminal Law (Amendment) (Offences in the

Name or on Pretext of Honour) Act, 2016, whereby an

offence that has been committed in the name or on the

pretext of honour has been categorized as an offence

falling within the meaning of ‘fasad-fil-arz’. As per

provisions of section 311 of PPC, if the principle of

fasad-fil-arz is attracted, the court may having regard to

the facts and circumstances of the case, punish an

offender against whom the right of qisas has been waived

or compounded with death or imprisonment of life or

imprisonment of either description for a term of which

may extend to fourteen years as ta’zir. The sole proviso to

this section further provides that if the offence has been

committed in the name or on the pretext of honour, the

punishment shall be imprisonment for life.

Submission made by learned counsel for

petitioner that legal heirs of deceased who happened to be

the parents of deceased, have forgiven the

Crl. Misc. No.47663-B-2024

accused/petitioner and recorded their statements qua

compounding the offence, therefore, accused/petitioner is

entitled to be released on bail on the basis of compromise,

is of little avail as in view of the amendments as made in

sections 299(ee), section 302(c) and section 311 PPC read

with proviso to section 345(2-A) and 345 (7) of Cr.PC, a

convict in an honour killing case, still can face sentence of

imprisonment for life even if legal heirs of a victim have

settled the matter by way of compromise and pardoned

the convict. Therefore, the accused/petitioner is not

entitled to be released on bail on the basis of any

statement made by the legal heirs of the deceased whereby

they have compounded the offence as in view of

provisions of Sections 345(2-A) & 345(7) of the Cr.P.C.,

no offence shall be waived or compounded save as

provided by the provisions of section 311 PPC.

The next submission of learned counsel for the

petitioner is that there exists a glaring conflict between the

ocular account and medical evidence; therefore, the case

of the petitioner necessitates further inquiry entitling him

to the grant of post arrest bail. According to him, as per

witnesses of ocular account, the fire shot made by the

accused/petitioner landed on the back of the deceased

whereas as per postmortem report, the injury present on

the back of the deceased has been shown as an everted

wound, suggesting that it was an exit wound. This

argument hardly holds any water for the simple reason

that the sole argument qua conflict between medial

evidence and ocular account can hardly be appreciated

without deeper appreciation of evidence which exercise is

not warranted at bail stage1 particularly keeping in view

the peculiar facts and circumstances of the instant case

Crl. Misc. No.47663-B-2024

wherein accused/petitioner alone is named in the FIR with

specific role of making fire shot on the person of none

other than his real sister and he thereafter remained

fugitive from law for the period of around 5 months and

when rounded up got recovered firearm that was also sent

to the concerned quarters for its matching with the crime

empty secured by the investigator from the spot that had

already been sent to the concerned quarters much prior to

the recovery of firearm from the petitioner and last but not

the least, accused/petitioner upon conclusion of

investigation has been found involved in the commission

of alleged crime. There is no cavil with the proposition

that a case of further inquiry presupposes a tentative

assessment of the material brought on record starting from

the time of lodging of the FIR and the material collected

during the course of investigation till the conclusion of the

investigation, which in turn creates some doubt with

respect to the involvement of an accused in the

commission of crime, whereas the expression ‘reasonable

grounds’ refers to grounds that may be legally tenable,

admissible in evidence and appealing to a reasonable

judicial mind as opposed to being whimsical, arbitrary, or

presumptive. In case “Ata-ullah v. The State” (2014

SCMR 1210), the Supreme Court of Pakistan observed

that for all intents and purposes the doctrine of further

inquiry demonstrates notional and exploratory assessment

that may create doubt regarding involvement of an

accused in the commission of crime. Even in case “Mst.

Parveen Akhtar v. The State and others” (2002 SCMR

1886), it was observed that mere possibility of further

inquiry which existed almost in every criminal case was

not a ground for treating the matter as one of further

inquiry falling within the purview of section 497(2) of

Cr.PC. In the instant case, however, upon tentative

Crl. Misc. No.47663-B-2024

assessment of the material available with the prosecution,

this Court is convinced that reasonable grounds exist for

believing that the accused/petitioner has committed a nonbailable offence falling within the ambit of the prohibitory

clause as contained in Section 497 of Cr.PC, inasmuch as

overwhelming evidence is available on the record to

connect the accused/petitioner with the commission of the

alleged crime. No case of post-arrest bail at all is made

out. Petition is dismissed.

Needless to observe that observations made

hereinabove are tentative in nature and shall be considered

to have been made only to the extent of the decision of

instant bail petition and shall not in any manner influence

the trial court while deciding the main case. The learned

trial court is directed to proceed to decide the main case

expeditiously, preferably within a period of four months,

from the receipt of certified copy of this Order. Office is

directed to transmit a copy of this Order to learned trial

court, forthwith.

The research assistance provided by

Mr. Muhammad Afzil, Civil Judge/Research Officer,

Research Center, Lahore High Court is appreciated.

(Shakil Ahmad)

Judge

Mohsin Raza*

Approved for reporting

For more information call us 0092-324-4010279 Whatsapp Dear readers if u like this post plz comments and follow us. Thanks for reading .as you know our goal is to aware people of their rights and how can get their rights. we will answer every question, so we need your help to achieve our goal. plz tell people about this blog and subscribe to our youtube channel and follow us at the end of this post.