1992 P Cr (PLP)
Rana MUHAMMAD ARIF‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1992 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Riaz Ahmad, J |
| Parties | Rana MUHAMMAD ARIF‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1992 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1992 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Riaz Ahmad, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1992 P Cr (PLP) (Rana MUHAMMAD ARIF‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Shabbar Raza Rizvi for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑S. 497‑‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.317/328‑‑‑Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), S.10‑‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑ Female co‑accused had already been released on bail as during investigation Secretary Union Council had stated that Nikah of accused persons had not been registered while according to Nikah Khawan their Nikah had been performed‑‑‑Male accused who was behind the bars for the last five months was, therefore, also admitted to bail on the principle of consistency. Saleem Shad for the State.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑‑‑S. 497‑‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.317/328‑‑‑Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), S.10‑‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑ Female co‑accused had already been released on bail as during investigation Secretary Union Council had stated that Nikah of accused persons had not been registered while according to Nikah Khawan their Nikah had been performed‑‑‑Male accused who was behind the bars for the last five months was, therefore, also admitted to bail on the principle of consistency. Shabbar Raza Rizvi for Petitioner. Saleem Shad for the State. The petitioner and co‑accused Mst. Razia are accused for the commission of offences under sections 317 and 328, P.P.C. read with section 10 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance. The aforesaid offence came to light when allegedly Mst. Razia gave birth to a child, and subsequently she wanted to do away with him after the child had died. Thus, the instant case was registered against both the petitioner and Mst. Razia.
2. The plea raised in support of this petition for bail is that the petitioner and the co‑accused Mst. Razia are lawfully husband and wife.
3. During the investigation, the Secretary, Union Council stated that the Nikah had not been registered, while Nikah Khawan stated that the Nikah was performed. However, one of the witnesses denied the factum of Nikah. In these circumstances, Mst. Razia the co‑accused was admitted to bail by this Court. The petitioner is behind the bars for the last five months, Thus, following the principle of consistency, I am inclined to admit the petitioner to bail subject to his furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs.50,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of Assistant Commissioner Okara. N.H.Q./M‑103/L Bail granted.