1988 P Cr (PLP)
LAL and another‑‑Petitioners Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1988 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Sharif, J |
| Parties | LAL and another‑‑Petitioners Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1988 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 1988 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Muhammad Sharif, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1988 P Cr (PLP) (LAL and another‑‑Petitioners Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Malik Muhammad Aslam for Petitioners.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑S. 497‑‑Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), Ss. 10 & 11‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑Affidavit sworn by the prosecutrix showing that none committed rape with her and she married one of petitioners of her own free volition‑‑Prosecutrix's statement under S. 164, Cr.P.C. not got recorded and prosecution relying solely on her statement recorded by police under S. 161, Cr.P.C., which in turn appearing to be unnatural‑‑Petitioners behind the bars for over six months without trial‑-Petitioners allowed bail, in circumstances. Jameel Pirzada for the State.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑‑S. 497‑‑Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), Ss. 10 & 11‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑Affidavit sworn by the prosecutrix showing that none committed rape with her and she married one of petitioners of her own free volition‑‑Prosecutrix's statement under S. 164, Cr.P.C. not got recorded and prosecution relying solely on her statement recorded by police under S. 161, Cr.P.C., which in turn appearing to be unnatural‑‑Petitioners behind the bars for over six months without trial‑-Petitioners allowed bail, in circumstances. Malik Muhammad Aslam for Petitioners. Jameel Pirzada for the State. The petitioners have been arrested under sections 16(3) and 11 Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance VII of 1979. They have petitioned for being released on bail.
2. The facts narrated in the F. I. R., in substance, are that Allah Wasaya, the complainant, is a barber and lives in Chak No. 1/B.C. and Ghulam Muhammad happens to be his neighbour who was on visiting terms with him. The petitioners are the sons of Ghulam Muhammad and Lal Khan, petitioner No. 1, is stated to have developed amatorial ties with Mst. Manzooran, the minor daughter of the complainant. The complainant made a complaint to Ghulam Muhammad who scolded the complainant. Twelve or thirteen days before the lodging of the F.I.R. when the parents of Mst. Manzooran were not present in the house, she is stated to have been abducted by the petitioners and their accomplices allegedly for rape.
3. In this case, the affidavit of Mst. Manzooran is on the file which shows that she had married Allah Diwaya of her own free volition and none had committed rape with her. The copy of the Nikahnama manifests that Mst. Manzooran was married to Allah Diwaya son of Ghulam Muhammad on 29‑1‑1987. Her statement under section 164, Cr.P.C. was not recorded. She made a statement under section 161, Cr.P.C. and clarified that both the petitioners, who were real brothers, committed rape with her. It is not expected of a brother to rape a lady like Mst. Manzooran who was going to be the wife of his real brother. The petitioners are behind the bars for over six months and the trial against them has not yet commenced.
4. In the circumstances, I allow bail to both the petitioners in the sum of Rs.40,000 each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Assistant Commissioner/ Duty Magistrate Bahawalpur till the disposal of case against them. S.G.D./L‑22/L Bail allowed.