1987 PLP 2002(2) (MLD)
GUL TAYYAZ KHAN — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 1987 PLP 2002(2) (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Munir Khan, J |
| Parties | GUL TAYYAZ KHAN — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1987 PLP 2002(2) (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 1987 PLP 2002(2) (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Muhammad Munir Khan, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1987 PLP 2002(2) (MLD) (GUL TAYYAZ KHAN — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Muhammad Zaman Qureshi for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S.497--Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), Ss.10, 13 & 14--Bail, grant of--No allegation of buying or selling prosecutrix against accused--Accused only seen with co-accused and prosecutrix at time of their arrest--Bail allowed in circumstances.
Judgment & Decree
Muhammad Zaman Qureshi for Petitioner. This is an application for grant of bail to Gul Tayyaz Khan petitioner in a case under section 13/14 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979, registered at P.S. Qamar Mashani, District Mianwali, vide F.I.R. No. 40, dated 23-2-1987.
2. The prosecution case is that the co-accused of the petitioner namely Saif Ullah and Yaqoob had sold Mst. Rani to Bismillah co-accused. and others through Mausam Khan co-accused for Rs. 26,000 with intent that she may be used for illicit intercourse. As for the, petitioner it has been alleged that he was present alongwith the co-accused and Mst. Rani when they were arrested from Bazar Miran Shah. 3.Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on the allegations levelled against the petitioner in the F.I.R. accepted at its face value no offence punishable under section 13/14 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979 is made out against the petitioner. No one has appeared for the State to oppose this application.
4. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner with care. I feel persuaded to agree with him. I find that there are no allegations of buying/selling of Mst. Rani against the petitioner and that he was only seen present with the co-accused and Mst. Rani when they were arrested from Bazar Miran Shah. For what has been said above, I am of the view that a case for grant of bail to the petitioner is made out. He is, therefore, allowed bail in the sum of Rs. 20,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of Deputy Registrar (J) of this Court. S.A./G-65/L Bail allowed.