| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2026 SLG 4099 = 2026 SLD 4099 = 2026 MLD 1244 |
Crl. Misc. No. 8607/B/2025
Presented By: (Tariq Saleem Sheikh) Judge
30.10.2025 Sardar Muhammad Rafique Dogar, Advocate, for the Petitioner. Mr. Muhammad Waheed Rafique, Deputy District Public Prosecutor, with Khadija/SP (Investigation), Abbas/SI, Ramzan/SI and Zahid/ASI. Rana Muhammad Yousaf Noon, Advocate, for the Complainant.
Muhammad Naveed
VS
The State and another
Law: Pakistan Penal Code (PPC),1860
Section: 365-B
Law: Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898
Section: 161, 162, 164 & 497(2)
Law: Constitution of Pakistan 1973
Section: 10A
Law: Juvenile Justice System Act, 2018
Section: 2 & 6(3), 6(4), 6(5)
Law: Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, 1984
Section: 38, 39 & 40
Case Summary
The petitioner, a 15-year and 9-month-old juvenile, sought post-arrest bail in an FIR registered under Section 365-B PPC (abduction of a minor girl). The prosecution alleged that the abducted girl stayed at the petitioner's house for one night and relied mainly on Call Data Records (CDRs) and a video-recorded statement made by the petitioner while in police custody.
The High Court held that the petitioner's statement, recorded by the police during investigation and video-recorded while he was in custody, was inadmissible under Section 162 Cr.P.C. and could not be used against him, even at the bail stage. The Court further observed that the available CDRs did not conclusively connect the petitioner with the offence and that no independent incriminating evidence existed to establish his direct involvement.
The Court also held that since the petitioner was below sixteen years of age on the date of occurrence, Section 6(3) of the Juvenile Justice System Act, 2018 (JJSA) applied, requiring him to be treated as an accused of a bailable offence, irrespective of the nature of the charge. Consequently, the petitioner was granted post-arrest bail.