2009 PLP 1702 (YLR)
MUHAMMAD IQBAL — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2009 PLP 1702 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Tariq Shamim, J |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD IQBAL — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2009 PLP 1702 (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 2009 PLP 1702 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Tariq Shamim, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2009 PLP 1702 (YLR) (MUHAMMAD IQBAL — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- A.D. Nasim for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S.497
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.365-B, 376, 457, 395, 467, 468 & 471
Delay of 36 hours in lodging the F.I.R., had not been explained
Though allegation against accused was of having kidnapped/ abducted the daughter of complainant along with others, but apart from that no other allegation was against him
Main accused in the case was son of accused who allegedly contracted marriage with the daughter of the complainant
Victim in her statement recorded on oath by the Family Court, did not level any allegation of abduction or commission of zina against accused, who was father of main accused
After the suit for jactitation of marriage was decreed in favour of the victim, she had contracted marriage with another person
Accused was behind the bars for the last about one year and three months and he was not required by the Police for any purpose
Accused was admitted to bail, in circumstances. Ch. Asif Sattar for the Complainant. Ch. Amjad Hussain, Deputy P.-G. for the State. Waris, S.-I.
Judgment & Decree
TARIQ SHAMIM, J.
Through this petition the petitioner seeks post-arrest bail in case F.I.R. No.360 of 2007, dated 10-5-2007 for offences under sections 365-B, 376, 457, 395, 467, 468 and 471, P.P.C, registered at Police Station Saddar Okara.
2. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the daughter of the complainant aged about 14/15 years was allegedly kidnapped by the petitioner and others at gunpoint, as a consequence whereof the aforesaid F.I.R. was lodged.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends that there is delay of 36 hours in lodging of the F.I.R. which has not been explained; that the alleged victim had, in fact, contracted marriage with the son of the petitioner, namely, Imran; that she filed a petition with the learned Additional Sessions Judge against illegal harassment by her father, that subsequently, she filed a suit for Jactitation of marriage and in her statement on oath she did not level 'any allegation against the petitioner; that admittedly, she has contracted marriage with another person and that at this stage, the petitioner is not required by the police for any purpose, therefore, he is entitled to be released on bail.
4. The learned Deputy Prosecutor-General assisted by the learned counsel for the complainant has vehemently opposed the petition.
5. Heard. Record perused.
6. There is delay of 36 hours in loding of the F.I.R. which has not been explained. Although the allegation against the petitioner is of having kidnapped/abducted the daughter of the complainant along with others but apart therefrom there is no other allegation against him. The main accused in this case is Imran son of the petitioner who allegedly contracted marriage with the daughter of the complainant. The victim in her statement recorded on oath by the learned Family Court did not level any allegation of abduction or commission of Zina against the petitioner, who is father of the main accused. After the suit for Jactiation of marriage was decreed in her favour she has contracted marriage with another person. The petitioner is behind the bars for the last about one year and three months and at this stage, he is not required by the police for any purpose.
7. For what has been stated above, this petition is allowed and the petitioner is admitted to bail subject to his furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. H.B.T./M-376/L Bail granted.