1984 P Cr (PLP)
AHMAD — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 1984 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Khizar Hayat, J |
| Parties | AHMAD — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1984 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 1984 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Khizar Hayat, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1984 P Cr (PLP) (AHMAD — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Malik Muhammad Ramzan Khalid for Petitioner. Muhammad Khalid Alvi for the State.
Headnotes / Summary
Ss. 497/498--Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (V11 of 1979), S. 10/16--Bail--Offence of Zina--Prosecutrix deflowered girl before alleged day of occurrence--Seven out of nine accused found innocent--Bail granted.
Judgment & Decree
Ss. 497/498--Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (V11 of 1979), S. 10/16--Bail--Offence of Zina--Prosecutrix deflowered girl before alleged day of occurrence--Seven out of nine accused found innocent--Bail granted. Malik Muhammad Ramzan Khalid for Petitioner. Muhammad Khalid Alvi for the State. Ahmad petitioner and his brother Muhammad allegedly committed rape on Mst. Naziran, complainant (allegedly a virgin girl) in the morning of 11th June, 1983 in the vicinity of Chak No.15, District Sahiwal, while seven other persons, close relatives of the petitioner, kept guard outside the room where Mst. Naziran was being raped. The case was registered the next day after the prosecutrix was got medically examined privately. Having remained unsuccessful before the Additional Sessions Judge, Sahiwal, the petitioner has approached this Court for the grant of bail.
2. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as for the State and also perused the record produced by S. Bashir Ahmad of Police Station Harrapa.
3. It is admitted that during the investigation seven out of nine accused named in the F.I.R. were declared innocent so much that Muhammad, brother of the petitioner, against whom also there was an allegation of committing rape, was found innocent. Ultimately, the petitioner and Zahoor, co-accused, have been challaned. The case is now pending in the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Sahiwal.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently contended that the prosecutrix being the star witness in the case has been disbelieved during the investigation qua seven co-accused and, therefore, there is no guarantee that allegation of rape levelled by her against the petitioner, was true. He next contended, that the prosecutrix, no doubt is an unmarried lady but, according to her medical examination, her vagina admitted two fingers easily. This assertion of the learned counsel has not been controverted either by the Investigating Officer or by the learned State counsel.
5. In the circumstances narrated above, that the prosecutrix was a deflowered girl before the alleged day of occurrence and that seven accused persons named by her in the F.I.R. have been found innocent. I am inclined to allow this petition. It is directed that the petitioner be released on bail subject to his furnishing a bond in the sum of Rs.20,000 (Rupees Twenty Thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of Assistant Commissioner/ Duty Magistrate, Sahiwal. M. Y. H. Bail granted