1989 P Cr (PLP)
HAZOOR BAKHSH‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1989 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Abdul Majid Tiwana, J |
| Parties | HAZOOR BAKHSH‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions 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: Abdul Majid Tiwana, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 P Cr (PLP) (HAZOOR BAKHSH‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Islami Ali Qureshi for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑ ‑‑‑S. 497‑‑Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), Ss.10 & 11‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑Nikah solemnised between complainant and accused‑ Case registered against accused on her return to house of her parents after about more than 1‑1/2 months‑‑Execution of Nikahnama, a moot point between parties‑‑Case of further inquiry‑‑Bail granted in circumstances. Nasim Rashad for the State.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑‑S. 497‑‑Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), Ss.10 & 11‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑Nikah solemnised between complainant and accused‑ Case registered against accused on her return to house of her parents after about more than 1‑1/2 months‑‑Execution of Nikahnama, a moot point between parties‑‑Case of further inquiry‑‑Bail granted in circumstances. Islami Ali Qureshi for Petitioner. Nasim Rashad for the State. Petitioner is one of the accused in cases F.I.R. No. 270 registered at Police Station Jampur on 9‑10‑1988 under sections 10/11 and 16 of Ordinance VII of 1979. The allegations against the petitioner are that he went on committing Zina‑bil‑Jabr with Mst. Hajra Bibi complainant after she had been abducted by deceitful means by his co‑accused. It is argued on behalf of the petitioner that Mst. Hajra complainant was adult and as per medico‑legal report she did not suffer any mark of violence which indicates that she was a consenting party and allegations of Zina‑bil‑Jabr were false. According to the learned counsel, the complainant in the F.I.R. itself had admitted that her Nikah was solemnised with the petitioner but she alleged duress and compulsion which makes a case of further inquiry. The application has been opposed on behalf of the prosecution on the ground that the complainant was compelled to go through the so‑called marriage ceremony and her thumb‑impression were forcibly, obtained. The Nikah alleged by the petitioner with the complainant was solemnised on 22‑8‑1988 as it appears from the copy of Nikahnama and the case was registered against him and others on 9‑10‑1988 after she returned to the house of her parents. Whether or not the Nikahnama executed by the parties thereto is a genuine document, is a moot point and since it becomes a case of further inquiry, the petitioner is, therefore, granted bail if he furnishes bail bond in the sum of Rs. 20,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of Assistant Commissioner/Duty Magistrate, Jampur. SA./H‑120/L Bail granted.