PESHAWAR (manend News) Peshawar High Court has rejected plea of a juvenile accused seeking bail on grounds of compromise and his juvenility in a case of gang rape of a woman.
A single-member bench of Justice Dr Khurshid Iqbal observed that the offence was non-compoundable, besides relating to moral turpitude and being of a heinous nature. The petitioner was arrested in connection with an FIR registered on Apr 19, 2026, at Rahimabad police station, Swat, under different provisions of Pakistan Penal Code.
The complainant had told police that she was a divorced woman residing with her mother, who was not mentally sound, while her father had passed away. She claimed that on the day of occurrence, she was alone at home as other inmates had gone towards their relatives.
She alleged that the petitioner with two other coaccused trespassed into the house. She said that they, by use of force, subjected her to rape, turn by turn. She alleged that they also recorded video of the act through a mobile phone, besides extending life threats in case of disclosing the incident to anyone.
The bail plea of the petitioner was earlier rejected by the court on merit and now he sought bail on ground of juvenility and compromise with the victim. Last month, the bail-petition of the accused was also turned down by a gender-based violence court in Swat.
The victim had informed the said court that the compromise was conditional. She had claimed that a jirga had resolved that she would be paid compensation amounting to Rs50,000 , which she claimed had not been paid to her till date.
The petitioner’s counsel contended before the high court that it had earlier granted bail to a co-accused in the case on the ground that he was a juvenile offender.
He added that the present petitioner was a juvenile at the time of occurrence and was entitled to bail.
The bench observed that admittedly the co-accused had been granted bail by the court on the ground of his juvenility in terms of Section 6(3) of Juvenile Justice System Act, 2013, when he was found to be less than 16 years of age in view of his Nadra record.
“However, the Nadra record shows the date of birth of the present applicant as 04.03.2010. Thus, he was more than 16 years of age on the day of occurrence. This ground had already been considered by this court in his earlier bail application and was declined,” the bench observed.
The petitioner had also submitted an affidavit of June 2, 2026, stating that the victim had no objection if he was released on bail. The victim and her brother, who were present before the court, also stated that they didn’t want to pursue the instant bail petition.
The bench observed that the affidavit only carried the thumb impression of the victim, without any involvement or acknowledgment of her family members or the elders of the locality.
“In such circumstances, particularly keeping in view the nature and gravity of the offence, the alleged compromise between the applicant and the victim, at this stage, cannot be made a base for extending the concession of bail to the applicant. Needless to say, the effect, if any, of such compromise may be considered by the learned trial court at the appropriate stage, in accordance with law,” the bench ruled.