2001 PLP 1570 (MLD)
FATEH KHAN‑‑‑Appellant Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 2001 PLP 1570 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Federal Shariat Court |
| Bench Members | Single Bench |
| Parties | FATEH KHAN‑‑‑Appellant Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2001 PLP 1570 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2001 PLP 1570 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Federal Shariat Court bench comprising: Honorable Judges.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2001 PLP 1570 (MLD) (FATEH KHAN‑‑‑Appellant Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ijaz Ahmad Awan for Appellant.
- Date of hearing: 20th September, 2000.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑S.10‑‑‑Appreciation of evidence‑‑‑Argument that the victim woman was used to intercourse, was based on the statement made by lady doctor who had found the hymen of the victim being old ruptured and had observed that her vagina admitted two fingers easily‑‑‑Victim being a married woman, it was not important that her hymen was found ruptured and her vagina admitted two fingers‑‑‑If eye‑witness examined in the case was father of the victim, the accused himself was closely related to the victim as well as the eye witness as his sister was married to son of eye‑witness and said eye‑witness could not lodge a false case against the accused in view of such nearest relation with the accused‑‑‑Prosecution having fully proved the case against the accused beyond any reasonable doubt, conviction and sentence awarded to the accused by the Trial Court were upheld‑‑‑Accused who had not cared to spare a woman who was real sister of the husband of his own sister, did not deserve any leniency, but as no sentence of fine was prescribed for conviction under S.10(3) of Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979, the sentence of fine was set aside. Mian Abdul Qayyum Anjum for the State.