1988 PLP r (PCRLJ)
ALLAH DAD‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1988 PLP r (PCRLJ) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Qurban Sadiq Ikram, J |
| Parties | ALLAH DAD‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1988 PLP r (PCRLJ)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1988 PLP r (PCRLJ)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Qurban Sadiq Ikram, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1988 PLP r (PCRLJ) (ALLAH DAD‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ch. Abdul Hafiz for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑S. 497‑‑Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), Ss.10 & 16‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑No allegation of abduction or rape against accused‑‑Accused allegedly appearing before Panchayat and promising to help in restoration of abductee but failing to do so‑‑Bail granted in circumstances. Abdur Rashid Sheikh for the State.
Judgment & Decree
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 647/B of 1985, decided on 2nd July, 1985. ‑‑S. 497‑‑Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), Ss.10 & 16‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑No allegation of abduction or rape against accused‑‑Accused allegedly appearing before Panchayat and promising to help in restoration of abductee but failing to do so‑‑Bail granted in circumstances. Ch. Abdul Hafiz for Petitioner. Abdur Rashid Sheikh for the State. This is a petition for bail on behalf of Allah Dad in a case under section 10/16 (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance No. VII of 1979 which arose out of F.I.R. No. 263, dated 28‑5‑1983. The occurrence took place about one month before the registration of case. It was alleged by Muhammad Hayat complainant that he married Mst. Manzooran about 7/8 months earlier. She developed illicit relations with Muhammad Shafi accused. About a month before the registration of the case he got up during the night and found his wife missing. He also found Muhammad Shafi accused absent from his house. The complainant referred the matter to a Panchayat for return of his wife. Allah Dad petitioner and other relatives of Muhammad Shafi were called by the Panchayat. They promised to restore Mst. Manzooran but failed to oblige the complainant. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the State and have also gone through the record. The only allegation against Allah Dad is that he was called by the Panchayat where he promised alongwith other relatives to help in the restoration of Mst. Manzooran to the complainant. He failed in his efforts. There is no allegation that Allah Dad petitioner abducted Mst. Manzooran or committed rape on her. Allah Dad is allowed bail on his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.5,000 (Rs. Five thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of A . C . /Duty Magistrate, Multan. S.A./A‑251/L Bail granted.