1998 PLP 1598 (MLD)
ASAD ALI — Petitioner Versus STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 1998 PLP 1598 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | ASAD ALI — Petitioner Versus STATE — Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1998 PLP 1598 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1998 PLP 1598 (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 1598 (MLD) (ASAD ALI — Petitioner Versus STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Syed Murtaza Ali Zaidi for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 377
Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), S. 12
Alleged offence was reported to the police after 10 days of occurrence and the victim was also medically examined after 10 days
Victim having medically been examined after 10 days of alleged incident, report of Chemical Examiner showing semen, had made case that of further inquiry
Judgment & Decree
Syed Murtaza Ali Zaidi for Petitioner. Ibrahim Farooq for the State. Date of hearing: 14th January, 1998. The petitioner is involved in a case under section 12 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979 read with section 377, P.P.C., registered vide F.I.R. No.167 of 1997, dated 31-8-1997 with Police Station Shahkot, Tehsil Chichawatni District Sahiwal.
2. According to F.I.R., on 21-8-1997 at about 3 p.m. while Yasir Zeb, the son of the complainant, was going back to his home Asad Ali, the petitioner, invited him into his Bethak, bolted the door and thereafter Committed sodomy with Yasir Zeb, on hue and cry, the P.Ws. Tariq Raza and Muhammad Shafique were attracted out the accused ran away. The matter was reported to the Police after 10 days and that the victim was also medically examined after 10 days.
3. Bail is pressed on the grounds that the petitioner has been falsely involved in the case due to previous enmity and even earlier a false case vide F.I.R. No.26 of 1992 dated 23=2-1992 under sections 337/A, 337/B, 337/F and 34, P.P.C. was registered on the statement of Muhammad Shafi who is also a witness in the present F.I.R. and that another F.I.R. No.196 of 1997 dated 25-9-1997 under sections 382 and 337/H-II, P.P.C. has been registered against and his brother which was found false and that the delay of 10 days in lodging the F.I.R. and medical examination of the victim has not been explained. In the alternative, it has also been argued that there is no allegation of abduction and the voluntarily accompanying of the victim with the accused brings the case under section 377, P.P.C. which offence is not covered by the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. It is also submitted that the petitioner is behind the bar since 15-10-1997, the investigation is complete and the object is merely to harass, humiliate and disrepute the petitioner and his family.
4. The petition is opposed on the grounds that the petitioner is named in the F.I.R. with specific role and that the medico-legal report is positive.
5. I have heard the arguments of learned counsel on both the sides and have gone through the police file. The tentative assessment of the material available on the record is that coming of the Report of the Chemical Examiner of a victim examined after 10 days having the semen makes the case that of a further inquiry. In this circumstance, the petitioner is granted bail subject to his furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs.10,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Trial Court. H.B.T./A-254/L Bail granted.