2008 PLP 529 (MLD)
MUHAMMAD RAMZAN alias RAMZOO, MOTTI, HEERA, JANI, PAPU and MUSTAFA and others — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2008 PLP 529 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD RAMZAN alias RAMZOO, MOTTI, HEERA, JANI, PAPU and MUSTAFA and others — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2008 PLP 529 (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 2008 PLP 529 (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: 2008 PLP 529 (MLD) (MUHAMMAD RAMZAN alias RAMZOO, MOTTI, HEERA, JANI, PAPU and MUSTAFA and others — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Muhammad Javed Iqbal Thaheem for Petitioners.
Headnotes / Summary
S.497(2)
Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), S.11--Bail, grant of
Accused, who were arrested, remained on physical remand for 14 days, but during that period alleged abductee could not be recovered at their instance
Except for oral statement of the complainant, no incriminating evidence was available against accused to the effect that they had abducted alleged abductee or had been seen with her by anyone
Accused and co-accused were parents of other accused whose participation for the abduction of alleged victims with their sons appeared to be an unbelievable story
Accused who were in jail, their further detention in jail for indefinite period, would serve no useful purpose to the prosecution
Accused had succeeded in making out a case of further inquiry and culpability of accused in the occurrence would be seen by the Trial Court after recording the evidence
Judgment & Decree
IJAZ AHMAD CHAUDHRY, J.
Through this application under section 497, Cr.P.C. Muhammad Ramzan alias Ramzoo, Motti, Heera, Jani, Papu and Mustafa, petitioner seeks post-arrest bail in a case F.I.R. No. 714 of 2006, dated 14-10-2006 registered under section 11, Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hadood) Ordinance VII of 1979 at Police Station Saddar, Okara on the application of Muhammad Bashir Ahmad, the complainant.
2. The brief allegation against the petitioners is that on 10-10-2006 at about 2-00 a.m. they along with co-accused while armed with different weapons forcibly abducted Mst. Kamra. Bibi, aged about 17 years and Mst. Azra Bibi aged about 15 years, daughters of the complainant on gun-point and took them in a vehicle for the purpose to commit zit. with them.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that Muhammad Ramzan (petitioner) and Mst. Manzooran Bibi (co-accused) are parents of the other accused-petitioner; that the accused persons were arrested by the police and they remained on physical remand for 14 days but during that period, the abductees could not be recovered at their instance; that there is no connecting evidence against the petitioner to book them in the present case and their further detention in jail will serve no useful purpose to the prosecution.
4. The learned Additional Prosecutor General has vehemently opposed this bail petition.
5. I have heard the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record with due care and caution.
6. The petitioners were arrested by the police and they remained on physical remand for 14 days but during that period, the alleged abductees could not be recovered at their instance. Except for oral statement of the complainant there is no incriminating evidence against the petitioner that they had abducted the alleged abductee or had been seen by anyone. Muhammad Ramzan alias Ramzoo (petitioner) and Manzooran Bibi, co-accused are parents of the other accused-petitioner, whose participation for the abduction of alleged victims with their sons appears to be an unbelievable story. The petitioners are in jail, whose further detention in jail for indefinite period will serve no useful purpose to the prosecution. In such circumstances the petitioners have succeeded in making out a case of "further inquiry and culpability of petitioners in the occurrence will be seen by the learned Trial Court after recording the evidence. For the foregoing reasons, the instant bail petition is accepted and the petitioners are admitted to bail subject to furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 each with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court. H.B.T./M-552/L Bail granted.