1998 PLP 1602 (MLD)
MUNIR AHMAD and another — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 1998 PLP 1602 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | MUNIR AHMAD and another — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1998 PLP 1602 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1998 PLP 1602 (MLD)?
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: 1998 PLP 1602 (MLD) (MUNIR AHMAD and another — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Tariq Muhammad Iqbal Chaudhry for Petitioners.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497
Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), S. 16
Challan of case was submitted in the Court after about two months from the arrest of accused and despite pendency of case for about six months not a single witness had been recorded
One of the accused being a woman, was entitled to concession of bail as admissible to her under proviso to S. 497, Cr.P.C.
Alleged offence being not covered by the prohibitory clause of S. 497, Cr.P.C., accused could not be kept in confinement for indefinite period nor they could be punished for the slackness on the part of the prosecution especially when either of the accused had no criminal history-- Accused were admitted to bail.
Judgment & Decree
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 1223/B of 1997, decided on 16th October, 1997.
S. 497
Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), S. 16
Challan of case was submitted in the Court after about two months from the arrest of accused and despite pendency of case for about six months not a single witness had been recorded
One of the accused being a woman, was entitled to concession of bail as admissible to her under proviso to S. 497, Cr.P.C.
Alleged offence being not covered by the prohibitory clause of S. 497, Cr.P.C., accused could not be kept in confinement for indefinite period nor they could be punished for the slackness on the part of the prosecution especially when either of the accused had no criminal history-- Accused were admitted to bail. Tariq Muhammad Iqbal Chaudhry for Petitioners. Muhammad Rafiq for the State. Submits that petitioners are involved in case F.I.R. No.162 of 1996 dated 10-7-1996 under section 16/7/79. The case was registered on 10-7-1996 on the statement of Muhammad Usman that one year prior to the occurrence when he was out of the house his wife had been taken away and ultimately the accusation fell on the petitioner. Petitioners Nos. l and 2 claim themselves to be married as husband and wife which fact is controverted by the complainant. The petitioner was arrested on 2-3-1997. The challan was submitted in Court on 26-4-1997 but in spite of pendency of the case for about six months not a single witness has been recorded so far. Petitioner No.2 being woman is entitled to concession of bail as admissible to her under proviso to section 497, Cr.P.C. The alleged offence is not covered by the prohibitory clause, therefore, the petitioners cannot be kept in confinement for indefinite period nor they can be punished for the slackness on the part of the prosecution. Either of the; petitioners has no criminal history.
2. This petition is, therefore, allowed and the petitioners are admitted to bail on their furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.50,000 each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. H.B.T./M-665/L Bail granted