1987 PLP 2008 (MLD)
ABDUL QAYYUM — petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 1987 PLP 2008 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Khizar Hayat, J |
| Parties | ABDUL QAYYUM — petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1987 PLP 2008 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1987 PLP 2008 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Khizar Hayat, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1987 PLP 2008 (MLD) (ABDUL QAYYUM — petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Zaheer Ahmad Mirza for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S.497--Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood? Ordinance (VII of 1979), S.10--Bail, grant of--Petitioner claiming of having contracted marriage with prosecutrix of her own free will according to Muslim rites and Nikahnama--Question whether abductee's attestation on Nikahnama obtained forcibly or prosecutrix contracted Nikah with petitioner of her free will requiring thorough probe at trial--Petitioner allowed bail in circumstances. Wilayat Umar Chaudhary for the State.
Judgment & Decree
Kalandar Khan lodged a report at Police Station City Chiniot, district Jhang, on 26-12-1986 alleging that his daughter Mst. Nasim Begum aged 16/17 years has been enticed away by Abdul Qayyum, petitioner, and his mother. Mst. Bashiran since 22-12-1986 with intention or knowledge that Zina shall be committed with her. During the investigation, the abductee was produced before the Investigating Officer by the complainant on 15-3-1987. She was medically examined and her statement under section 164, Cr.P.C., was recorded by the Ilaqa Magistrate. In that statement she supported the prosecution and implicated the petitioner. The petitioner was arrested on 17-3-1987 and is in. jail since then. The petitioner's bail plea was declined by the lower Court, hence this application. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as for the State and also perused the record.
2. It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that the abductee is a sui juris who contracted Nikah with him of her own free will according to, the Muslim rites and Nikahnama concerned was registered under the law on 13-8-1986. Subsequently, on account of certain differences with him she had gone to her parents where her father in connivance with the police got registered instant case against the petitioner. The petitioner is stated to have produced Nikahnama during the investigation The ASI who is present with record admits this abductee had stated that her attestation on the said Nikahnama was obtained per force.
3. Be that as it may, the question whether the abductee is a attestation on the Nikahnama was obtained forcibly or she had contracted Nikah with the petitioner of her own free will needs thorough probe which exercise can now be undertaken only at trial stage. In the circumstances, I feel inclined to allow this petition. The petitioner is directed to be released subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.20,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of Assistant Commissioner/ Duty Magistrate, Chiniot. S. G.D. /A-131/L Bail allowed.