P L D 1982 Lahore 119 (PLP)
Before Gulbaz Khan, J HADEES‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑Respondent
| Citation | P L D 1982 Lahore 119 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | |
| Bench Members | Gulbaz Khan, J HADEES‑Petitioner |
| Parties | Before Gulbaz Khan, J HADEES‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in P L D 1982 Lahore 119 (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case P L D 1982 Lahore 119 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the bench comprising: Gulbaz Khan, J HADEES‑Petitioner.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: P L D 1982 Lahore 119 (PLP) (Before Gulbaz Khan, J HADEES‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Abdul Aziz Qureshi for Petitioner.
- Date of hearing : 3rd November, 1981.
Headnotes / Summary
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑ ‑‑ S. 497‑Bail ‑ Petitioner seen by two witnesses running out of house allegedly after committing rape upon his victim finding her alone in her father's house‑Shalwar of girl found to be stained with semen‑Contention that no marks of violence found on body of victim, she was a lady of immoral character, and P. Ws. were set up in retaliation to an earlier reprimand by petitioner, he was falsely involved in case‑Repelled‑Possibility of such like false allegation to be made against an accused person, held, quite remote‑Bail declined, in circum stances. Rana Maqbool Ahmad. for the State.
Judgment & Decree
There is an allegation of rape against present petitioner. Mst. Hameedan complainant was present in the house of her father. The male members of the family were away in the fields. The petitioner entered the house of the father of the complainant and took her in a room, felled her, cut the string of shalwar with the knife, removed her shalwar and committed rape upon her. The complainant raised noise, which attracted Wali Muhammad and Sher Muhammad P. Ws., who saw the petitioner running out of the room. The petitioner had cleaned his private parts with the shalwar of the complainant. An effort was made for compromise through the respectables of the village but the father of the complainant did not agree to it. Hameedan made statement before Muhammad Rafiq, A. S. I. while she was proceeding towards the police station. She produced the shalwar, which she was wearing at the time of occurrence. This shalwar was found to be stained with semen.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that no mark of violence had been found on the body of the complainant; that according to the report of the Chemical Examiner, swabs were not stained with semen; that the complainant was a lady of immoral character and she was carrying on with Sher Muhammad P. W. and prior to the occurrence, the petitioner had reprimanded Sher Muhammad and for the said reason, a false case had been registered; that the other witness, namely, Wali Muhammad was a ,close relative of the complainant; and that it was a case of further inquiry.
3. The grounds have been considered. There are serious allegations against the petitioner. According to the complainant, the petitioner had committed rape upon her. The shalwar was found to be stained with semen. It is a remote possibility that such like false allegation would be made against an accused person. There are reasonable grounds to believe that the petitioner is guilty of an offence punishable under section 11, Ordinance VIII of 1979. The petition is without force and is dismissed. Petition dismissed.