1984 P Cr (PLP)
ALLAH BAKHSH-Petitioner Versus THE STATE-Respondent
| Citation | 1984 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Kamal Mustafa Bokhari, J |
| Parties | ALLAH BAKHSH-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: Kamal Mustafa Bokhari, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1984 P Cr (PLP) (ALLAH BAKHSH-Petitioner Versus THE STATE-Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Muhammad Ramzan Khalid Malik for Petitioner.
- Date of hearing: 11th June, 1983.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497-Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), S. 10 & 11-Bail, grant of-Petitioner, accused of committ ing Zina-bil-Jabr as punishable under sections 10 & 11 of Offence of Zina Ordinance, behind bars for over 8 months-Person of petitioner no longer required for further investigation-Trial delayed for no fault of petitioner as challan against petitioner not filed in trial court as yet-Petitioner allowed bail, in circumstances. Muhammad Khalid Alvi for the State.
Judgment & Decree
Muhammad Ramzan Khalid Malik for Petitioner. Muhammad Khalid Alvi for the State. Date of hearing: 11th June, 1983. Petitioner in this case is accused of an offence under sections 10 and 11 of Ordinance VII of 1979. It is alleged that the committed Zina-bil-jabr with the prosecutrix in the afternoon of 29-9-1982 when she was cutting grass in the field.
2. It has been argued that there is a delay of 20 hours in lodging the F. I. R. although the Police Station was only two miles away from the spot, that the petitioner was arrested on 30-9-1982 and since then he is lodged in the judicial lockup without any challan being filed in Court and that petitioner has been falsely implicated due to enmity arising out of property dispute. It has also been submitted that pro secutrix was not medically examined in this case. No result of Chemical Examiner relating to semen has been obtained. The release of petitioner on bail has been opposed by learned counsel for the State. He has sub mitted that a complete challan was filed with the Martial Law Authorities, on 31-1-1983 and since then papers are lying there for a decision as to whether the trial is to be made by a Summary Military Court or by the criminal Court concerned.
3. The person of petitioner is no longer required for further investigation. He is in custody since 30-9-1982 and the trial has been delayed for no fault of the petitioner. In the circumstances the petitioner A is allowed bail subject to his furnishing security in the sum of Rs. 10,000 (Rupees ten thousand) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of Assistant Commissioner/Duty Magistrate, Lodhran. M. Y. H. Bail granted.