1986 P Cr (PLP)
QASIM ALI Petitioner Versus THE STATE Respondent
| Citation | 1986 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Munir Khan, J |
| Parties | QASIM ALI Petitioner Versus THE STATE Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1986 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 1986 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: 1986 P Cr (PLP) (QASIM ALI Petitioner Versus THE STATE Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Abdul Sattar for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑S. 497‑‑Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), S. 10(2)‑‑Extra‑judicial confession‑‑Grant of bail‑‑No direct evidence of commission of Zina by accused available‑‑Extra‑judicial confession of cc‑accused of having illicit relations with accused /petitioner present‑‑Question of guilt of accused in circumstances, held, required further enquiry‑‑Bail was allowed. Ozair Chughtai for the State.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑‑S. 497‑‑Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), S. 10(2)‑‑Extra‑judicial confession‑‑Grant of bail‑‑No direct evidence of commission of Zina by accused available‑‑Extra‑judicial confession of cc‑accused of having illicit relations with accused /petitioner present‑‑Question of guilt of accused in circumstances, held, required further enquiry‑‑Bail was allowed. Abdul Sattar for Petitioner. Ozair Chughtai for the State. This is an application for bail on behalf of Qasim Ali in case under section 10(2) of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance VII of 1979 registered at Police Station Minchinabad vide F.I.R. No. 221/84, dated 21‑9‑1984. The prosecution case is that the petitioner had been committing sexual intercourse with her. The learned counsel for the petitioner ‑submits that there is no direct evidence of the commission of Zina by the petitioner with Mgt, Nawab Bibi. Conversely the learned counsel for the State has opposed the plea for bail of the petitioner.
2. I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties with care. I find that there is no direct evidence of the commission of Zina by the petitioner with Mgt. Nawab Bibi and that A the evidence collected by police against the petitioner is of extra‑judicial confession of Mgt. Nawab Bibi the co‑accused to the effect that she had illicit relations with the petitioner.
3. For what has been found above the question of guilt of petitioner requires further enquiry so I feel inclined to allow him bail in the sum of Rs.10,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of Assistant Commissioner/ Duty Magistrate, Minchinabad. S. A. Bail allowed.