Allegation of Prostitution and Forensic Evidence

In a significant decision, the Lahore High Court granted post-arrest bail to Khalida Bibi and Atiq-ur-Rehman in a case involving allegations of prostitution under FIR No.1534. This judgment highlights the importance of proper procedural adherence and the limitations of certain penal provisions in addressing such offenses.

Key Areas:

Case Background: The petitioners were arrested during a police raid at Dildar Abass's house, allegedly used as a brothel. They were charged under Sections 371A and 371B of the Pakistan Penal Code (PPC), with Khalida Bibi found in possession of Rs. 1500, purportedly received for prostitution.

Prosecution's Argument: The prosecution argued that prostitution is a societal menace and that the police are authorized to enter suspected places without a warrant under the Police Order, 2002. They suggested that Section 294 PPC, which addresses obscene acts in public, could also be applicable.

Court’s Analysis: The court clarified that Sections 371A and 371B PPC target individuals involved in the buying and selling of persons for prostitution, not those merely found engaging in consensual sexual acts. It cited "Amjad Ali and another v. The State" (PLD 2013 Federal Shariat Court 42) and "Riffat Ali Barq v. S.H.O., Police Station, Muzaffarabad" (1991 P Cr. L.J 9) to support this interpretation. The court also highlighted the Punjab Suppression of Prostitution Ordinance, 1961, as the relevant law for running a brothel, which was not invoked in this case.

Lack of Evidence: The court noted the absence of a medico-legal report or forensic evidence to support the allegations of recent intercourse or Khalida Bibi’s status as a prostitute. Additionally, there was no material linking Dildar Abass’s house to brothel activities.

Conclusion: Judge Muhammad Amjad Rafiq concluded that the charges under Sections 371A and 371B PPC were not applicable to the petitioners based on the available evidence. The court granted bail, recognizing that the petitioners' case warranted further inquiry under Section 497(2) Cr.P.C. This decision underscores the need for credible evidence and proper procedural adherence in such cases.

Contact Us:

For individuals facing similar legal challenges or seeking expert advice on criminal defense and procedural compliance, AUJ LAWYERS LLP offers comprehensive legal services. Our firm is dedicated to ensuring your legal needs are met with precision and expertise. Contact us today for professional legal assistance.

We are here to help

Talk to our lawyers today. We tailor our services around your legal needs so that we can reach the desired outcome together.