PCRLJ 1989

1989 P Cr (PLP)

GHULAM ALI‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent

Jurisdiction / Court
Lahore
Decided Date
Criminal Miscellaneous No: 765‑B of 1988/BWP, decided on 6th June, 1988.
Honorable Judges
Muhammad Munir Khan, J
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 1989 P Cr (PLP)
Forum / Court Lahore
Bench Members Muhammad Munir Khan, J
Parties GHULAM ALI‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent
Primary Law Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 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 1989 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: 1989 P Cr (PLP) (GHULAM ALI‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑

Representation

  • Malik Muhammad Aslam for Petitioner.

Headnotes / Summary

‑‑‑S. 497‑‑Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), Ss.10 & 11‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑No allegation of Zina levelled against accused who remained with police after his arrest‑‑Abductee having not been recovered, no useful purpose, held, would be served by keeping accused in jail till recovery of abductee‑‑Bail granted. M. Jameel Aslam Pirzada for the State.

Judgment & Decree

Malik Muhammad Aslam for Petitioner. M. Jameel Aslam Pirzada for the State. This is an application for grant 'of bail to Ghulam Ali petitioner in a case under section 10/11 of Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hadd) Ordinance, 1979 registered at P.S. Saddar Bahawalpur, vide F.I.R. No. 104/86.

2. The prosecution case is that the petitioner and others abducted Mst. Rashidah Bibi in order to subject her to illicit intercourse. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Mst. Rashidah Bibi is legally‑wedded wife of Abdul Ghaffar the son of the petitioner. The learned counsel for the State assisted by the learned counsel for the complainant has opposed this application on the ground that Mst. Rashidah Bibi has not been recovered so far and that the petitioner had participated in her abduction by his son.

3. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties with care. I find that there arc no allegations of Zina against the petitioner; that he remained with the police after his arrest but Mst. Rashidah Bibi could not be recovered and as such no useful purpose would be served by keeping him in jail till the recovery of Mst. Rashidah Bibi.

4. For what has been said above I am of the view that case for grant of6ail to the petitioner has been made out. He is, therefore, allowed bail in the sum of Rs.10,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of A.C./Duty Magistrate, Bahawalpur. H.B.T./G‑188/L Bail granted.