1985 P Cr (PLP)
IFTIKHAR‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1985 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Abdul Waheed, J |
| Parties | IFTIKHAR‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1985 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 1985 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Abdul Waheed, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1985 P Cr (PLP) (IFTIKHAR‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑S. 497‑‑Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), S. 12‑‑Bail‑‑Accused a student of sixth class and 14 years of age according to Medical Officer‑‑Many persons appearing before Investigating Officer to vouchsafe innocence of accused‑‑Bail granted to accused in view of his tender age. Ch. Muhammad Yamin for Petiti6ner. Muhammad Shah Nawaz for the State.
Judgment & Decree
Ch. Muhammad Yamin for Petiti6ner. Muhammad Shah Nawaz for the State. This is an application for post arrest bail of Iftikhar in a case registered against him and another at Police Station Saddar, Sialkot, on 20th of March, 1985, under section 12 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979.
2. The allegation is that on 17th of March, 1985, at about 4‑00 p.m. the petitioner and his co‑accused namely, Farooq Ahmad enticed away Rafaqat, aged about .8 years, to a wheat field and there the petitioner committed unnatural offence with him. The allegation against the co‑accused is that he was holding Rafaqat at the time of the alleged occurrence.
3. The co‑accused has been granted bail by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sialkot, vide his order, dated 9th of April, 1985 on the ground that he is only 10 years old and the only allegation against him is that he caught hold of the victim while the petitioner has been declined bail in view of the allegation that he committed the offence.
4. According to the Medical Officer, the petitioner is about 14 years of age. It is contented on his behalf by the learned counsel that in fact his age is only 12 years and he is a student of sixth class
5. His bail is sought on the ground of his tender age. It is asserted that the case against the petitioner is false and motivated. It is also stated that many persons have appeared before the Investigating Officer to vouchsafe the innocence of the petitioner. This fact is admitted by the learned State counsel.
6. In view of the tender age of the petitioner, this application is accepted and the petitioner is admitted to bait' in the sum of Rs.10,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Assistant Commissioner, Sialkot. H.A.K Bail granted.