2007 PLP 2807 (YLR)
FAYYAZ AHMAD — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2007 PLP 2807 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Jehangir Arshad, J |
| Parties | FAYYAZ AHMAD — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2007 PLP 2807 (YLR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2007 PLP 2807 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Muhammad Jehangir Arshad, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2007 PLP 2807 (YLR) (FAYYAZ AHMAD — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Muhammad Sharif Bhatti for Petitioners.
Headnotes / Summary
Ss. 497 & 156-B
Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), Ss. 10(2) & 11
Alleged abductee present in the court had in unequivocal terms confirmed her marriage with accused and denied her alleged abduction by any person including the accused
Photocopy of Nikahnama was also available on record, whereby marriage of accused with female co-accused had taken place
When alleged abductee/co accused had admitted her Nikah with accused and denied allegation of complainant about her abduction and accused had been arrested without following the procedure as laid down in 5.156-B, Cr.P.C., accused were admitted to bail, in circumstances. Abdul Rasheed Rashid for the Complainant. Muhammad Nadim Asif for the State along with Sarfraz, S.-I.
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD JEHANGIR ARSHAD, J.
The petitioners being accused in cage F.I.R. No. 220 dated 5-6-2005 under section 11/10(2), Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance VII of 1979 Police Station Khairpur Tamewali, seek post-arrest bail in the said case, on the ground that Fayyaz petitioner No.1 has contracted marriage with Mst. Shehnaz Mai with her free consent and will and that Haji Muhammad Zaman petitioner No.2 has been falsely involved. It is further argued that in view of the mandatory provisions of section 156-B, Cr.P.C. the petitioners have been arrested without permission from the court.
2. On the other hand, learned counsel for the complainant has opposed the prayer on the ground that Fayyaz petitioner No.1 having/ready contracted two marriages has no i allegedly contracted third marriage with'4st. Shehnaz.
3. Mst. Shehnaz the alleged abductee/ accused is present in Court and has in unequivocal terms confirmed her marriage with Fayyaz petitioner and denied her alleged abduction by any person including the petitioners. Photocopy of Nikahnama is also available on the record, whereby marriage of Fayyaz petitioner No. 1 and Mst. Shehnaz Mai took place on 18-10-2004.
4. In view of the above circumstances, when Mst. Shehnaz Mai admits her Nikah with Fayyaz petitioner No.1 and denies the allegations of the complainant about her abduction and that petitioners have been arrested without following the, procedure as laid down in section 156-B, Cr.P.C., this petition is allowed and the petitioners are admitted to bail subject to their furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.50,000/- each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of D.R.(J) of this Bench. H.B.T./F-4/L Bail granted.