1988 P Cr (PLP)
ALLAH NAWAZ‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1988 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Rafiq Tarar, J |
| Parties | ALLAH NAWAZ‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1988 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1988 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Muhammad Rafiq Tarar, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1988 P Cr (PLP) (ALLAH NAWAZ‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Q.M. Salim for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑S. 497‑‑Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), S.11‑‑Offences Against Property (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VI of 1979), S.14‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑Allegation in first information report showing that it was a case of elopement and during investigations nothing was recovered from accused‑‑Accused iri jail since long‑‑Bail granted. Sardar Muhammad Khurshid for the State.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑‑S. 497‑‑Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), S.11‑‑Offences Against Property (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VI of 1979), S.14‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑Allegation in first information report showing that it was a case of elopement and during investigations nothing was recovered from accused‑‑Accused iri jail since long‑‑Bail granted. Q.M. Salim for Petitioner. Sardar Muhammad Khurshid for the State. Petitioner has moved this petition for bail in a case registered against him and his co‑accused Rasul Bakhsh under section 11 of Ordinance VII of 1979 and section 14 of Ordinance VI of 1979.
2. The prosecution version is that Mst. Shamim Akhtar developed relations with co‑accused Rasul Bakhsh and was on visiting terms with him. On 24‑4‑1986, aforesaid Rasul Bakhsh and the petitioner took away Mst. Shamim Akhtar from the house of her brother Mubarik Ali. On the way, Rasul Bakhsh told Ibrahim and Khalid Hussain that Mst. Shamim Akhtar was going to her brother Khalid Ahmed. On checking the household effects, some ornaments and Rs.19,000 in cash were found missing. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the allegations indicate that Mst. Shamim Akhtar had gone with co‑accused Rasul Bakhsh of her own. It is further submitted that she has contracted marriage with aforesaid Rasul Bakhsh. I have gone through the relevant material. The allegations in the F.I.R. prima facie show that it was a case of elopement. The petitioner was arrested on 18‑6‑1985, and is in jail since then. During the investigations nothing was recovered from him. In the circumstances, I admit him to bail in the sum of Rs.20,000 with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of A . C . /Duty Magistrate. Kasur. M.Y.H./A‑363/L Bail granted.