2000 PLP 603 (YLR)
MUMTAZ NUSSAIN‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 2000 PLP 603 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Mian Muhammad Najum‑uz‑Zaman, J |
| Parties | MUMTAZ NUSSAIN‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2000 PLP 603 (YLR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2000 PLP 603 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Mian Muhammad Najum‑uz‑Zaman, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2000 PLP 603 (YLR) (MUMTAZ NUSSAIN‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Altaf Ibraheem Qureshi for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑S.497(2)‑‑‑Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), S.16/10‑‑‑Bail‑‑‑Abductee during investigation had also been arrayed as an accused in the case and she had been released on bail by Sessions Court‑‑‑Both the accused had claimed themselves to be legally wedded husband and wife‑‑‑Genuineness of Nikah of the spouses could only be determined by t) Trial Court after appropriate assessment, the prosecution evidence‑‑‑Case of accuse being one of further inquiry, he was entitle to the concession of bail‑‑ Accused was, allowed bail accordingly. State. Abdul Hameed Khokhar for the
Judgment & Decree
State. Abdul Hameed Khokhar for the Petitioner seeks his post‑arrest bail in case F.1.R. No. 19 of 1998, dated 13‑1‑1998 registered under section 16/10 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance No. VII, 1979 a Police Station Saddar, Pakpattan Shaif.
2. Precise allegation against the petitioner as alleged in the F.I.R., is that he enticed away Mst. Zuhran Bib.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Mst. Zuhran Bibi is legally wedded wife of the petitioner and that he contracted marriage with said Mst. Zuhran with her willingness and consent, thus, the petitioner has offence. committed no offence.
4. Learned counsel for the State has vehemently‑opposed the contentions raised by learned counsel for the petitioner.
5. I have heard both the parties and have gone through the documents attached with this petition.
6. According to the prosecution's own case, Mst. Zuhran Bibi was abducted by the petitioner for the purpose of illicit relations but during the investigation, Mst. Zuhran Bibi was also arrayed as an accused person and she was allowed bail by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Pakpattan Sharif' vide order, dated 16‑2‑1999. The claim of the petitioner is that Mst. Zuhran Bibi is his legally wedded wife. The same stand was also taken by Mst. Zuhran Bibi before the lower Court. The question with regard to the genuineness of the Nikah between the spouses could only be determined by the Trial Court after appropriate assessment of the prosecution evidence. Prima facie, case of the petitioner requires further enquiry and he is entitled to the concession of bail. Accordingly, the petitioner is admitted to bail subject to furnishing bail bonds to the tune of Rs. 50,000 (Rupees fifty thousand) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court. N. H. Q./M‑1140/L Bail allowed.