2021 PLP 992 (MLD)
UMER KHAN — Petitioner Versus REHMAT ULLAH and another — Respondents
| Citation | 2021 PLP 992 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Gilgit-Baltistan Chief Court |
| Bench Members | Malik Haq Nawaz, CJ |
| Parties | UMER KHAN — Petitioner Versus REHMAT ULLAH and another — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2021 PLP 992 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2021 PLP 992 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Gilgit-Baltistan Chief Court bench comprising: Malik Haq Nawaz, CJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2021 PLP 992 (MLD) (UMER KHAN — Petitioner Versus REHMAT ULLAH and another — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Tanveer Akhtar for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S.497(5)
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 494, 496, 496-B, 511 & 34
Marrying again during lifetime of husband or wife, marriage ceremony fraudulently gone through without lawful marriage, fornication, common intention
Scope
Accused was alleged to have enticed away his sister-in-law for the purpose of marriage
Sessions Judge allowed the petition for grant of bail
Complainant sought cancellation of bail granted to the accused on the ground that he was directly nominated in the FIR and had committed an unlawful act which was against the Injunctions of Islam and also against the norms of society
Held; complainant had failed to point out any legal infirmity in the impugned order
No case for cancellation of bail was made out
Petition for cancellation of bail was dismissed, in circumstances.
Judgment & Decree
MALIK HAQ NAWAZ, CJ.
The instant petition has been moved by the learned counsel for the petitioner under section 497 (5) for cancellation of bail allowed to the respondent by the learned Session Judge Chilas vide order dated 28-10-2019.
2. Brief facts of the persecution story as reflected in the FIR are that on the night Rahmat Ullah son in law of Shehyar came at his house. At night Rehmat Ullah enticed away Mst. Gul Badan for the purpose of marriage. Mst. Sateel daughter of Shehyar was already in the wedlock of Rehmat Ullah. Early in the morning, Mst. Gul Badan and Rehmat Ullah were found missing in the house of complainant, and FIR was lodged accordingly.
3. Accused /petitioner had filed an application for his enlargement on bail before the learned Sessions Judge Diamer. The learned Sessions Judge Diamer after hearing both the parties allowed the petition and accused /petitioner was granted bail. Being aggrieved from the said order the present petitioner filed the instant petition under section 497(5) Cr.P.C. seeking cancellation of post arrest bail.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the respondent No.1/accused is directly nominated in the FIR and the accused has committed an unlawful act which is against injunctions of Islam and also against the norms of Society. He further submitted that the bail granted by learned Sessions Judge Chilas be recalled to meet the ends of justice. He lastly submitted that bail of the petitioner be recalled.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner at length and also gone through the record of the case.
6. The learned counsel for the petitioner failed to point out any legal infirmity in the impugned order therefore, no case is made out for cancellation of post arrest bail which has been allowed after taking into consideration all the pro and contra arguments by the learned trial Court.
7. The instant petition is dismissed in limine. File. SA/24/GB Petition dismissed.