GUL MUHAMMAD vs State S — 2024 PCrLJ 603 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

GUL MUHAMMAD VS State S. 497---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 365-B, 354-A, 427 & 509---Abduction, assault or use of criminal force to woman and stripping her of her clothes, mischief causing loss or damage to the amount of fifty rupees or upwards, demanding sexual favors using a verbal or non-verbal form of communication, causing any kind of annoyance---Bail, refusal of---No mistaken identity of the accused---Exposure of the victim girl to public view---Allegation against the petitioner/accused was that he forcibly compelled the complainant/victim (a medical student) waiting at a Bus Stop to sit in the motorcar; snatched her mobile phone and an amount of Rs.60,000/-; she was also ripped out of her Hijab; her face was exposed her ears and nose were pulled, and zip of her veil was opened, she was targeted with cuts on her body; so much so that her overall clothes were torn and the petitioner/accused also made her video---There was no mistaken identity as the petitioner/accused was known to the complainant as prior to the occurrence he had tried to develop friendship with her---Occurrence, in the present case, came about at the Bus Station which was in a thickly populated area---Petitioner/accused had surpassed all the limits, who had tried his level best to kidnap the complainant by portraying her to be his lawfully wedded wife and with such gestures, she might have been thereafter compelled to marry him or otherwise he may have seduced her to illicit intercourse---Striping off Hijab of the complainant, exposing her physical appearance before the gathering, fell within the ingredients of the conditions laid down in S. 354-A, P.P.C. as it might amount to her exposure to the public view as obviously dragging her to motorcar by use of criminal force with intention to ridicule a young girl, tearing her overall and, harming her on her body, obviously would bring a bad name for the whole family---It was a crime which might invite capital punishment leaving no scope for further inquiry---Such occurrences needed strongest condemnation and grant of bail ought to be declined in such cases---Bail was refused, in circumstances.

GUL MUHAMMAD vs State S — 2024 PCrLJ 603 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2024 PCRLJ