1988 P Cr (PLP)
Mst. SALMA BIBI‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1988 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Munir Khan, J |
| Parties | Mst. SALMA BIBI‑‑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 Munir Khan, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1988 P Cr (PLP) (Mst. SALMA BIBI‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ch. Muhammad Ashraf Mahandra for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑Ss. 497 & 513‑‑Bail‑‑Accused refusing to be released on surety bond filed by her husband‑‑Complaint was lodged by her father‑in- law‑‑Court modifying order and directing that accused should be released on surety bond to be filed by her father. Hafiz M. Saeed for the State.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑‑Ss. 497 & 513‑‑Bail‑‑Accused refusing to be released on surety bond filed by her husband‑‑Complaint was lodged by her father‑in- law‑‑Court modifying order and directing that accused should be released on surety bond to be filed by her father. Ch. Muhammad Ashraf Mahandra for Petitioner. Hafiz M. Saeed for the State. The facts giving rise to this miscellaneous petition, briefly, are that a case under sections 10, 16 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979 was registered against Mst. Salma Bibi petitioner and Muhammad Iqbal at P.S. City Sadiqabad vide F.I.R. No. 213 of 1985. The petitioner as well as Muhammad Iqbal were arrested. On the application moved by Mst. Salma Bibi petitioner, the learned Additional Sessions Judge while granting bail on 12‑12‑1985 imposed the condition that the husband and father‑in‑law of the petitioner who happened to be the complainant in the case shall stand surety for her. The husband of Mst. Salma Bibi filed surety bond in the Court. After the attestation of surety bond, the personal bond as well as the release order were sent to jail but the petitioner refused to be released on the surety bond filed by her husband, hence this application for the modification of condition.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since the father‑in‑law was the complainant, the trial Court should not have imposed the condition that the husband and the father‑in‑law shall stand surety. Conversely, the learned counsel for the State has opposed this application.
3. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties with care. Since the complaint was lodged by the father‑in‑law, therefore, I feel inclined to modify the order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge and it is directed that she shall be released on furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs.30,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of A . C . /Duty Magistrate, Rahimyar Khan with further condition that Wall Muhammad, the real father of the petitioner shall stand surety for her. Order accordingly. M.Y.H./S‑171/L Bail order modified.