1997 P Cr (PLP)
MUHAMMAD YAR — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 1997 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD YAR — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1997 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1997 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1997 P Cr (PLP) (MUHAMMAD YAR — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Syed Murtaza Ali Zaidi and Malik Muhammad Afzal for Petitioner. Mushtaq Ali for the State.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497
Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), S.16
Abductee after her recovery in a statement recorded under S.164, Cr.P.C. had acknowledged that no one had committed Zina with her-- Only allegation against accused was of having been seen travelling with the main accused in a wagon at the time of abduction
Guilt or otherwise of the accused could be determined only after recording of evidence by Trial Court
Offence alleged against accused did not fall within the prohibitory clause of S.49.7(1), Cr.P.C. and grant of bail could not be withheld as a matter of punishment-- Accused was granted bail accordingly.
Judgment & Decree
Petitioner Muhammad Yar is seeking post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No.60 of 1996, dated 26-3-1996, under section 16 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979 for an occurrence alleged to have taken place on 15-3-1996.
2. The abductee/Alam Khatoon on recovery made a statement under section 164, Cr.P.C. on 8-5-1996 in support of the contents of the F.I.R. acknowledging that no one committed Zina with her. The only allegation against the petitioner is that he was seen travelling with the main accused Manzoor Ahmad in a wagon at the time of abduction. The guilt or otherwise of the petitioner shall be determined only after the recording of the evidence and as the offence alleged against the petitioner does not fall within prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C., therefore, grant of bail cannot be withheld as a matter of punishment. The application is, therefore, allowed and the petitioner is granted bail subject to his furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs.50,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of A.C./Duty Magistrate, Chichawatni. N.H.Q./M-282/L Bail granted.