Case Details

Citation(s)
2025 SLG 5452 2025 SLD 5452 = 2025 PCRLJ 1693
Sindh High Court
Criminal Bail Application No. 2515 of 2024, decided on 5th March, 2025.
Before Jan Ali Junejo,
Rashid Hussain along with Applicant. Mumtaz Ali Shah, Assistant Prosecutor General along with P.I. Ghazala PS Jackson for the State. Dr. Syed Waseem Raza for the Complainant.

ARSALAN KHAN---Applicant

VERSUS

The STATE---Respondent

Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Section: 498,164

Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

Section: 377,511,377A,377B

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)-------S. 498---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 377 & 511---Compelling minors to commit sodamy with each other---Punishable with imprisonment---Ad-interim pre-arrest bail, recalling of---Applicant was accused of compelling two minors under the threat of a firearm to engage in sodomy with one another---Applicant allegedly recorded videos and took nude photographs of the victims to blackmail them into further sexual exploitation---Such allegations were strongly supported by the victims' sworn testimonies under S.164, Cr.P.C., which explicitly identified the applicant as the principal offender---During trial proceedings, the applicant accessed his mobile phonecontaining explicit materialby entering the password, thereby confirming his sole control over the device---Trial Court reviewed the video evidence, which depicted the minors in a state of visible fear and distress, corroborating the use of coercion---Said material substantiated the applicant's intent to exploit the victims through blackmail---Video evidence, combined with the S.164, Cr.P.C statements, formed irrefutable proof of guilt---Gravity of the offence, marked by the sexual exploitation of minors, intimidation and blackmailing constituted a severe societal harm, necessitating the outright rejection of bail---Such crimes strike at the core societal values and demand zero tolerance---Evaluating evidentiary inconsistencies at this stage was inappropriate, as bail hearings were not intended for exhaustive trial like scrutiny---Given the heinous nature of the charges and their profound impact on communal conscience, the denial of bail was imperative to uphold justice and protect vulnerable victims---Given that the applicant was, prima facie, linked to the charges under Ss.377, 511 & 377A, P.P.C, read in conjunction with S.377-B, he was not eligible for bail at the current stage---Bail petitionwas accordingly dismissed---Ad-interim pre-arrest bail granted to the applicant was recalled.Date of hearing: 5th March, 2025.ORDERJAN ALI JUNEJO, J.---The present Criminal Bail Application has been filed on behalf of the Applicant/Accused, who is seeking pre-arrest bail in…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register