2002 PLP 949 (MLD)
RAFIQUE AHMAD‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 2002 PLP 949 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Bashir A. Mujahid, J |
| Parties | RAFIQUE AHMAD‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2002 PLP 949 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2002 PLP 949 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Bashir A. Mujahid, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2002 PLP 949 (MLD) (RAFIQUE AHMAD‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Syed Muhammad Anwar Jamil Shah for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑S.497‑‑‑Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), S.10‑‑‑Bail, grant of ‑‑‑Co‑accused named in F.I.R. were declared innocent during investigation‑‑‑Alleged eye‑witness .who was father of complainant had exonerated accused from commission of offence‑‑ Complainant/alleged victim, was a married lady and her medical report had not shown mark of violence on her body‑‑‑Accused was behind bar for the last about 7 months and conclusion of trial in near future was not in sight‑‑‑Case of accused being of further inquiry, accused was admitted to bail, in circumstances. Azam Javaid for the State
Judgment & Decree
Azam Javaid for the State Rafiq Ahmad, petitioner seeks post‑arrest bail in case F.I.R. No.30 of 1999 registered at Police Station Tarinda Muhammad Pariah under section 10(4), but challaned under section 18/10(3) of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979) at the instance of Mst. Razia Bibi.
2. The allegation against the petitioner as per F.I.R. is that Razia Bibi was present alone in her house as she was pregnant for the last 9 months when petitioner alongwith his co‑accused Sadiq and Riaz entered in the house of the petitioner and petitioner and Muhammad Sadiq committed Zina‑bil‑Jabr with her on pistol point.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that during the investigation co‑accused Muhammad Sadiq and Riaz were found innocent. The alleged two witnesses namely Noor Ahmad and Mazhar Ismail, father of the complainant were stated to have witnessed the occurrence while the petitioner and his co‑accused were running from the spot. The real father of the complainant has sworn an affidavit and has not supported the prosecution version. It is further argued that in the F.I.R. itself the motive is alleged that Shabbir husband's brother of the complainant was suspected illicit relations with Shamshad wife of the petitioner and to take revenge the present occurrence has been committed. It is further argued that medical report has not supported the occurrence.
4. Learned counsel for the State has opposed the bail application on the ground that the petitioner is named in the F.I.R. Report of Chemical Examiner is in positive which shows that the offence of Zina has been committed with her.
5. I have considered the arguments of the both sides.
6. The co‑accused named in the F.I.R. namely Sadiq and Riaz were declared innocent during the investigation. The alleged eye‑witness namely Mazhar Ismail father of the complainant has also exonerated the petitioner from the commission of offence. The complainant is admittedly married lady. Her medical report shows that there was no mark of violence on her body. The petitioner was arrested on 3‑2‑1999 and there is no possibility of the conclusion of trial in near future. The case of the petitioner is of further inquiry. Resultantly the petitioner is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs.50,000 with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court. H.B.T.R-113/L Bail granted.