2006 PLP 1587 (YLR)
MUHAMMAD AKRAM — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2006 PLP 1587 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Nazir Ahmed Siddiqui, J |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD AKRAM — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2006 PLP 1587 (YLR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2006 PLP 1587 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Nazir Ahmed Siddiqui, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2006 PLP 1587 (YLR) (MUHAMMAD AKRAM — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Tariq Zulfiqar Ahmad Ch. for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497
Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), Ss.10 & 16
F.I.R. showed that accused and his co-accused, after having abducted wife of complainant, had committed Zina with her
Delay of 53 days in lodging F.I.R. and accused was behind the bars for the last more than three months and challan had not been submitted
Alleged abductee was not recovered either from accused or co-accused
Abductee had come to house of complainant of her own and made a statement before Magistrate under S.164, Cr.P.C. in absence of accused and co-accused, wherein she had involved sisters of accused with reference to her abduction and levelled allegation of Zina against accused and other persons whereas co-accused was also shown to be present at the place of occurrence as a Guard
Said ladies and co-accused had been declared innocent by the police
Such aspect impliedly suggested that statement of alleged abductee appeared to be somewhat exaggerated
Birth certificate showed that accused's age was of 15 years, whereas age of alleged abductee who was mother of four children, was 40 years
Case of accused, in circumstances was covered under Juvenile Justice System Ordinance, 2000--Alleged abductee had also filed a suit for dissolution of marriage against her husband/complainant, wherein she had not supported the story of F.I.R.
No previous history of accused of his involvement in such-like cases existed
Accused was admitted to bail, in circumstances. Khawaja Qaiser Butt for the Complainant. Mumtaz Hussain Awan for the State.
Judgment & Decree
NAZIR AHMAD SIDDIQUI, J.--Petitioner seeks post-arrest bail in a case registered vide F.I.R. No.215 of 2005, dated 23-7-2005 under sections 10/16 of Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance VII of 1979 at Police Station Kassowal District Sahiwal.
2. As per F.I.R., petitioner and other accused after having abducted the wife of the complainant, committed zina with her.
3. Arguments heard. Record perused.
4. There is a delay of 53 days in lodging the F.I.R., that the petitioner is behind the bars for the last more than three months and the Challan has not yet been submitted; that the alleged abductee was not recovered either from the petitioner or other accused and she has come to the house of the complainant, of her own on 17-7-2005 and she. made a statement before the learned Magistrate under section 164, Cr.P.C. in absence of the petitioner and other accused persons, wherein she had involved the sisters of the petitioner with reference to her abduction and levelled allegation of zina against the petitioner and other accused persons whereas co-accused Shah Muhammad was also shown to be present at the 'place of occurrence, as a Guard. It is not denied that the said ladies and Shah Muhammad had been declared innocent by the Police. This aspect impliedly suggests that the statement of the abductee appeared to be somewhat exaggerated; that as per birth certificate of the petitioner issued by the Secretary Union Council No.64 Chak No.718 GB, Kamalia District Toba Tek Singh, he was born on., 10-6-1990 and this entry was recorded in the record on 17-6-1990. This being so, age of the petitioner comes to 15 years, whereas the age of the alleged abductee (mother of four children) is 40 years. Seen from this angle, case of the petitioner also covered under the Juvenile Justice System Ordinance, 2000; that the alleged abductee has also filed a suit for dissolution of marriage against her husband/complainant on 21-6-2005 wherein she had not supported the story of F.I.R. and she had also filed a private complaint against her husband and others in the Court of learned Illaqa Magistrate, Khanewal negating the case set up in the F.I.R.; that there is no previous history of the petitioner of his involvement in such like cases.
5. For what has been stated above, this petition is allowed and the petitioner is admitted to bail subject to furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.50,000 (Rs. Fifty thousand) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court/Duty Judge. Copy Dasti. H.B.T./M-196/L Bail granted.