1997 PLP 2596 (MLD)
Mst. ZAIB-UN-NISA — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 1997 PLP 2596 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | Mst. ZAIB-UN-NISA — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1997 PLP 2596 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1997 PLP 2596 (MLD)?
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: 1997 PLP 2596 (MLD) (Mst. ZAIB-UN-NISA — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Syed Zahid Hussain Bokhari for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497
Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), S.10
Offences Against Property (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VI of ,1979), S.14
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.379
Question whether the second marriage of accused lady after the divorce having pronounced by the complainant was unlawful, could be determined either at the trial or in some other proceedings and her case at such stage was one of further inquiry
Even otherwise accused being a woman her case was covered by first proviso to S. 497(1), Cr.P.C.
Judgment & Decree
Syed Zahid Hussain Bokhari for Petitioner. Malik Suleman for the State. Bail is sought by Mst. Zaib-un-Nisa, in a case registered against her under section 10 of Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance VII of 1979 read with section 14 of Offences Against Property (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, VI of 1979 and section 379, P.P.C. vide F.I.R. No.138 dated 13-9-1993, at Police Station, Ferozwala, District Sheikhupura.
2. Complainant is the husband of the petitioner. The allegation against her is that she deserted the complainant and her children and married another person during subsistence of the first marriage between the complainant and the petitioner. It is further alleged that the petitioner also took away some money and various household articles etc.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it is apparent from the contents of the F.I.R. itself that the complainant had divorced the petitioner, therefore, the second marriage was contracted by her after the complainant had pronounced Talak. The allegations of Zina and theft have been levelled mala fidely so as to compel the petitioner to go back to the complainant's house.
4. Learned counsel for the State on the other hand contends that the petitioner should not be enlarged on bail, because she will indulge in Zina if she comes out of the jail. The question whether the second marriage is void will be determined either at the trial or in some other proceedings. At this stage, it is a case of further inquiry as to whether the second marriage after the Talak had been pronounced by the complainant is unlawful otherwise also petitioner being a woman, her case is covered by the first proviso to subsection (1) of section 497, Cr,P.C.
5. Resultantly, petitioner is allowed bail in the sum of Rs.20,000 (Rs. twenty thousand only), with two sureties, in the like amount, to the satisfaction of A.C./Duty Magistrate, Ferozewala, District Sheikhupura. N.H.Q./Z-12/L Bail allowed.