1994 P Cr (PLP)
MUNIR AHMAD — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 1994 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | MUNIR AHMAD — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1994 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 1994 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1994 P Cr (PLP) (MUNIR AHMAD — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Mazhar Iqbal Sindhu for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497(2)
Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), S. 10/13/14/18
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 454
Bail, grant of-- Prosecution version stated in the F.I.R. had a material contradiction which had brought the case of accused within the ambit of S. 497(2), Cr.P.C.
Accused who had been in judicial custody for over eight months was neither a previous convict nor a hardened criminal and was no longer required by the police-- Accused was allowed bail in circumstances.
Judgment & Decree
S. 497(2)
Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), S. 10/13/14/18
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 454
Bail, grant of-- Prosecution version stated in the F.I.R. had a material contradiction which had brought the case of accused within the ambit of S. 497(2), Cr.P.C.
Accused who had been in judicial custody for over eight months was neither a previous convict nor a hardened criminal and was no longer required by the police-- Accused was allowed bail in circumstances. Mazhar Iqbal Sindhu for Petitioner. Badar Munir Malik for the State. Date of hearing: 11th January, 1994. The petitioner is one of the accused in a case registered vide F.I.R. No.292, dated 23-5-1993 under sections 10, 13, 14 and 18 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979 read with section 454, P.P.C. at Police Station City "A" Division, Sheikhupura.
2. According to the F.I.R. in brief, the petitioner is alleged to have participated in the alleged occurrence.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner and the State were heard at length in respect of the contentions raised herein. It was confirmed on behalf of the State that there is material contradiction in the prosecution version stated in the F.I.R. to the effect that the place of occurrence was locked from outside i.e. the lock had been placed on the doors to the said quarter but nevertheless, the complainant has also stated in F.I.R. to the effect that later on the present petitioner/accused was allowed to scale over the wall and open the door from inside to facilitate the complainant Police Officer to enter in the said quarter. Therefore, it is hereby observed that such a material contradiction in the version of the prosecution brings the case of the petitioner within the ambit of subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C. It was further confirmed that the petitioner is neither a previous convict nor a hardened criminal and that he is no longer required by the police and has been in judicial custody for over 8 months. Therefore, the petitioner is hereby allowed bail in the sum of Rs.20,000 with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the A.C./Duty Magistrate, Sheikhupura. N.H.Q./M-1487/L Bail allowed.