2008 PLP 397 (MLD)
MUHAMMAD RAMZAN — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2008 PLP 397 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD RAMZAN — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2008 PLP 397 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2008 PLP 397 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2008 PLP 397 (MLD) (MUHAMMAD RAMZAN — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Altaf Ibrahim Qureshi for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497
Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), S.18
Delay of three days in lodging F.I.R. was not properly explained
Co-accused had been declared innocent and it had been found during investigation that case against accused appeared to be doubtful and that finding was supported by reasons that neither accused nor wife of complainant were found naked
Statement of said lady recorded under S.161, Cr.P.C. was not in line with the story incorporated in the F.I.R.
No previous history of involvement of accused in such like cases was on record and there was no likelihood of commencement of trial in near future
Judgment & Decree
NAZIR AHMAD SIDDIQUI, J
Petitioner seeks post-arrest bail in a case registered vide F.I.R. No. 372 of 2005, dated 2-12-2005 under section 18 of Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, VII of 1979 at police station Saddar Burewala District Vehari.
2. As per F.I.R, at about 3/4 pm on 29-11-2005 when the complainant's wife Mst. Shehnaz Bibi had gone to a nearby field of sugar-cane to ease herself, petitioner along with co-accused Muhammad Jameel attempted to commit Zina with her.
3. Arguments heard. Record perused.
4. There is a delay of three days in lodging the F.I.R. not properly explained; that co-accused Jameel had been declared innocent; that it has been found during the investigation that the case appears to be doubtful. This finding is supported by reasons and the facts noted by the Investigating Officer; that neither the petitioner nor Mst. Shehnaz Bibi, wife of the complainant were found naked and statement of the said lady recorded under section 161, Cr.P.C. is not in line with the story incorporated in the F.I.R.; that there is no previous history of involvement of the petitioner in such like cases; that there is no likelihood of commencement of, trial in near future.
5. For what has been stated above, this petition is allowed and the petitioner is admitted to bail subject to furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.50,000 (Rs. Fifty thousand) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. H.B.T/M-321/L Bail granted.