2002 P Cr (PLP)
Mst. ZAHIDA BIBI and others — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2002 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | Mst. ZAHIDA BIBI and others — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2002 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2002 P Cr (PLP)?
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: 2002 P Cr (PLP) (Mst. ZAHIDA BIBI and others — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Rana Shakeel Ahmad Khan for Petitioners.
Headnotes / Summary
Ss. 426 & 497(1)
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.302--Suspension of sentence and grant of bail
Section 426, Cr.P.C. is controlled and provision of S.497(1), Cr.P.C.
Accused being a children, younger being 3 years old, needed help of the accused being their mother, to bring them up
Sentence of the accused was suspended and she` was admitted to bail in circumstances.
Judgment & Decree
PLD 1971 SC 617 ref. Rana Shakeel Ahmad Khan for Petitioners. N.A. Butt for the Complainant. This is an application for suspension of sentence on behalf of Mst. Zubaida Bibi. She was tried alongwith her sister Mst. Zahida Bibi and Muhammad Saleem husband of Mst. Zahida Bibi.
2. Allegations against the present petitioner and her co-accused were that they sprinkled kerosene oil on the person of Mst. Abida, who died later on due to burns received by her.
3. In support of this petition, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that no motive is attributed to the present petitioner and the same is attributed to Mst. Zahida Bibi, that petitioner has got five Children and the youngest one is about 2/3 years of age, that petitioner is a woman and her case is covered by 3rd proviso of section 497(1), Cr.P.C Adds that she was also allowed bail by this Court at the time of trial due to the fact that she was having suckling baby.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the complainant submits that according to birth certificate the youngest baby of the petitioner was born on 13-11-1998, that after recording the evidence the learned trial Court has declared the petitioner guilty of offence and awarded her imprisonment for life and that she is not entitled for the suspension of sentence.
5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. As far as merits of the case are concerned, I would not like to dialate upon this point so that it may not prejudice the case of either of the parties. Section 426, P. P. C. is controlled and guided by the provision of section 497(1), Cr.P.C. Petitioner is a woman, She has got five children and the youngest one is three years of age, in my view, these five children and specially the youngest one need the help of the petitioner, who is their real mother to bring them up. Relying on PLD 1971 SC 617, a case of suspension of sentence is made out in favour of the present petitioner, therefore, sentence of the petitioner is suspended subject of furnishing bail bonds' to the tune of Rs.30,000 (Rupees thirty thousand) with, one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of D.R. (Judl.) of this Court. J.A.M./Z-69/L Order accordingly.