2005 PLP 1593 (YLR)
ABDUL MAJEED — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2005 PLP 1593 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Nawaz Bhatti, J |
| Parties | ABDUL MAJEED — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2005 PLP 1593 (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 2005 PLP 1593 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Muhammad Nawaz Bhatti, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2005 PLP 1593 (YLR) (ABDUL MAJEED — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Mian Irshad Ali Qureshi for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S.497
Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VIII of 1979), S.10
Eye-witnesses had sworn affidavits that the occurrence had not taken place
Challan had been submitted in the Trial Court
Accused was behind the bars for the last about six months and he could not be detained there for an indefinite period
Bail was allowed to accused in circumstances. Mehr M. Ishfaq for the State. Ashfaq Ahmad, A.S.-I. with Record.
Judgment & Decree
Petitioner Abdul Majeed has moved this post-arrest bail petition in case F.I.R. No.134 of 2004 dated 6-6-2004 under section 10 of Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979 registered at Police Station, Kot Addu District, Muzaffargarh on the complaint of Mst. Naseem Mai.
2. Briefly the prosecution story as narrated in the F.I.R. is that the complainant/prosecutrix namely Mst. Naseem Mai who is a married woman having four children, on 5-6-2004 at Aserwela was caught hold by the petitioner/accused while cutting grass in the fields and he forcibly committed Zina-bil-Jabr with her and on hue and cry P.Ws. came at the place of occurrence and the accused/petitioner ran away.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the eye-witnesses of the occurrence Muhammad Yar father in law of the prosecutrix and Ahmad Bakhsh real maternal uncle of the prosecutrix have sworn affidavits that occurrence did not take place. Even two investigating agencies after their thorough investigation have opined that matter is being put forth on the mercy of the Court. Further submits that the petitioner is behind the bars since 6-9-2004 and he is innocent and has been involved in this case falsely.
4. On the other hand learned State counsel vehemently opposed the bail petition.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and carefully perused the record. Challan in this case has been submitted in the Court of competent jurisdiction. Petitioner is behind the bars since 6-9-2004 and even the eye-witnesses have sworn their affidavits that the occurrence did not take place. In this view of the matter the petitioner cannot be put behind the bars for an indefinite period. The petitioner is allowed bail subject to furnishing his bail bonds in the sum of Rs.50,000 with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court. N.H.Q./A-396/L Bail allowed.