IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN
(Appellate Jurisdiction)
PRESENT:
MR. JUSTICE UMAR ATA BANDIAL
MR. JUSTICE AMIN- UD-DIN KHAN
MR. JUSTICE SAY Y ED MAZAHAR ALl AKBAR NAQVI
CfA)
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 601-L OF 2021
(Against the order dated 15.07.2020 of the
Lahore High Court, Lahore passed in
Criminal Misc. No. 27091-B/2020)
Zafar Iqbal
Petitioner(s)
Versus
The State through Prosecutor General Punjab and another
.Respondent(s)
For the Petitioner: 
Mr. Akhtar Nawaz Raja, ASC
For the State: Mr. Muhammad Jaffar, Addl.P. U.
For the Complainant: Mr. Sarfraz Khan Gondal, ASC
Date of Hearing: 18.11.2 02 1
r
ORDER
SAYYED MAZAHA4R ALl AKBA.R NAQVI, J.- This petition is barred
by 248 days. In normal circumstances the reasons assigned in the
application for condonation of delay are not taken into consideration,
but keeping in view the facts and circumstance of this particular
case, we, in the interest of safe administration of criminal justice,
condone the delay of 248 days in filing the petition.
2. Through the instant petition under Article 185(3) of the
Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, the petitioner has
assailed the order dated 15. 07.2020 passed by the learned Single
Judge of the Lahore High Court, Lahore with a prayer to grant post-
arrest bail in case registered vide FIR No. 188 dated 08.07.2019
under Sections 30213411471109 PPC at Police Station Mela, District
Sargodha in the interest of safe administration of criminal justice.
I 
I
CRIMINAL PETIT!ON NO. 601-L 0P2021 
-. 2
3.
As per the contents of the crime report, the allegation
against the petitioner is that he along with co-accused inflicted sota
blows on the person of Azhar Iqbal deceased whereas the specific
allegation against the petitioner is that he gave sota blow which
landed on the left eye of deceased which was contributory in nature
which was result of his death.
4.
At the very outset it has been contended by the learned
counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has been falsely roped in
this case against the actual facts and circumstances. Contends that
the allegation against the petitioner that he caused injury to the
deceased is not substantiated from any material which could be
made basis for declining prayer of the petitioner. Contends that the
occurrence has taken place at the odd hours of the night and the
presence of the prosecution witnesses at that particular time does
not appeal to reason. Contends that during the course of
investigation, it transpired that the deceased had entered into the
house of the petitioner with the intent to commit rape with the young
daughter of the petitioner aged about 15116 years. Contends that
though the petitioner is found guilty during the course of
investigation but at the same time trespassing the house of a law
abiding citizen warrants reactionary response which ultimately
proved fatal. Contends that according to the medical report, the
cause of death is pulmonic failure and as such the petitioner is
entitled for the concession of bail as the case of the petitioner
squarely falls within the ambit of Section 497(2) Cr.P. C.
5.
On the other hand, it has been contended by the
learned Law Officer, assisted by the learned counsel for
complainant, that the petitioner is nominated in the crime report. He
is specifically ascribed injury No.1 which proved fatal towards the
death. Contends that six prosecution witnesses have been recorded
and as such the petitioner is not entitled for the concession of bail.
Learned Law Officer frankly conceded that during the course of
investigation, the finding of the Investigating Officer is that the
deceased has entered into the house of the petitioner in the midnight
S
I 
C
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 601-i OF 2023 
-:3:-
with intent to commit rape with the daughter of the petitioner which
act was ultimately retaliated causing death of the deceased.
6. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and
gone through the record.
It is salutary principle of law that each criminal case
has its own facts and circumstances and has to be decided
according to the peculiar facts surfaced on the record. There is no
denial to this fact that according to the contents of the crime report,
the petitioner is stated to be armed with sota who gave injury on the
vital part of the body of the deceased which was seen by the
prosecution witnesses. The said injury was subsequently found
contributory, however, during the course of investigation, the
contents of the crime report were found contradicted and entirely
different story was surfaced on the record. The Investigating Officer
gave a definite finding of fact that the deceased Azhar Iqbal had
illicit intimacy with the daughter of the petitioner and he on that
occasion with an intent to fulfill his lust trespassed into the house of
the petitioner, where he was overseen by the male members of the
family resulting into torture which proved fatal. There are certain
very specific reasons to entertain the petition in hand. It is difficult to
digest that the prosecution witnesses, mentioned in the crime report,
were actually present over there at the odd hours of the night to
observe the occurrence as given in the crime report. Further whether
at that odd hour of the night, the attempt of the deceased to trespass
in the house was bona fide at his part which ultimately resulted into
his death. All these queries when juxtaposed with the liberty of a
person who was forced to indulge into the crime, if any, the latter is
more precious as per the dictates of justice. Otherwise in suchlike
cases, the analogy can be drawn from the statutory law prevalent in
United Kingdom called "Homicide Act, 1957" wherein if a crime is
committed due to mental or psychological compulsion, it squarely
falls within the ambit of diminished liability. It is a legal doctrine
that absolves an accused person of part of the liability for his
criminal act if he suffers from such abnormality of mind as to
substantially impair his responsibility in Committing or being a party
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 601 -L OF 2021 
-:4:-
to an alleged criminal act, which is committed under the impulses of
question of ghairat, the doctrine of diminished liability would be
squarely attracted providing mitigation/ defence to avail the same in
suchlike cases, otherwise in ordinary circumstances the
commencement of trial itself is a sufficient ground to decline the
prayer of the petitioner, but in the instant case there are sufficient
grounds to believe that it is a case of further inquiry entitling for the
concession of bail wherein Section 497(4) Cr.P. C. can be pressed into
to do complete justice which is attire of this Court.
7. For what has been discussed above, this petition is
converted into appeal, allowed and the impugned order is set aside.
The petitioner is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds
in the sum of Rs.200,0001- with one surety in the li/ye amount to the
satisfaction of learned Trial Court. 
Lahore, the 
18 of November, 2021
Approved for reporting
Waqas Naseer/