2000 PLP 977 (YLR)
SIKANDAR‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 2000 PLP 977 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Raja Muhammad Khurshid, J |
| Parties | SIKANDAR‑‑‑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 977 (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 977 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Raja Muhammad Khurshid, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2000 PLP 977 (YLR) (SIKANDAR‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ch. Mumtaz Ahmad Bhalwana for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑S.497‑‑‑Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), S.10(2)‑‑ Bail‑‑‑Accused was named in the F.I.R.‑‑ Evidence was available on record to show that the accused had committed illicit intercourse with co‑accused who was a married woman‑‑‑No case for bail was made out in favour of accused in circumstances and his bail application was dismissed accordingly. Aziz Ahmad Chughtai for the State.
Judgment & Decree
A case under section 10 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979 is registered against the petitioner and his co‑accused Mst. Faiz Bibi who was initially the complainant in the case.
2. According to the F.I.R., the complainant Mst. Faiz Bibi made a report at the police station in which she contended that on the morning of 30‑6‑1998, she went out of her house for shopping. She was intercepted by the present petitioner on way who dragged her forcibly into his house. Nobody was present in his house at that time. The aforesaid Mst. Faiz Bibi was subject to Zina bil‑Jabr.
3. During the investigation, conducted by A.S.P. Badar Farrukh, it transpired that the complainant Mst. Faiz Bibi had illicit relations with the petitioner for a long time which was commonly known in the village. It was, therefore, found by the police that Mst. Faiz Bibi had committed Zina‑bil‑Raza with the accused/petitioner and as such, both of them were challaned.
4. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the co‑accused Mst. Faiz Bibi has since been admitted to bail, therefore, the petitioner be also granted bail. It is further submitted that the story contained in the F.I.R., has turned out to be false in respect of Zina‑bil‑Jabr and as such, the case would become that of further enquiry after the complainant has also been cited as accused with the petitioner.
5. Learned counsel for the State has, however, opposed the bail application on the ground that both the accused had been challaned for keeping illicit relations and committing Zina‑bil‑Raza and as such, the petitioner would have no case for bail as compared to his co‑accused Fazi Bibi who was granted bail being a woman under proviso to section 497, Cr.P.C.
6. I have considered the above submissions and find that the petitioner is named in the F.I.R., and there is evidence against him that he committed illicit intercourse with Mst. Faiz Bibi who is a married woman. As such, he has no case for bail at this stage. The petition is accordingly dismissed. N.H.Q./S‑411/L Bail refused.