1983 P Cr (PLP)
MUHAMMAD SIDDIQUE AND ANOTHER‑Petitioners Versus THE STATE‑Respondent
| Citation | 1983 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Rafiq Tarar, J |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD SIDDIQUE AND ANOTHER‑Petitioners Versus THE STATE‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1983 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 1983 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Muhammad Rafiq Tarar, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1983 P Cr (PLP) (MUHAMMAD SIDDIQUE AND ANOTHER‑Petitioners Versus THE STATE‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Mehar Ghulam Ali Mobashar for Petitioners.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑S. 497‑Bail‑Developing of illicit relations between parties alleg ed‑Police having no material regarding commission of Zina-- Petitioners allowed bail in circumstances of case. Ch. Muhammad Mansha for the State.
Judgment & Decree
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 898‑B of 1982, decided on 28th April, 1982. ‑‑S. 497‑Bail‑Developing of illicit relations between parties alleg ed‑Police having no material regarding commission of Zina-- Petitioners allowed bail in circumstances of case. Mehar Ghulam Ali Mobashar for Petitioners. Ch. Muhammad Mansha for the State. Muhammad Siddiq and Mst. Irshad Begum petitioners have moved this petition for bail in a case registered against them under sections 10 and DI of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979, and sections 380 and 411 of the Pakistan Penal Code. The case was registered on the report of Muhammad Nawaz, brother of Mst. Irshad Begum. 1n the F.I.R. he alleged that Muhammad Siddiq developed illicit relations with Mst. Irshad Begum, on the night between 20th, 21st September, 1981 be alongwith two others armed with guns and a hatchet trespassed in his house and took away Mst. Irshad Begum. The latter took away Rs. 2,000 in cash and some ornaments from the house.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioners contends that except the alleged statements of the petitioners before the police that they developed illicit relations with each other, there is no material with the prosecution to show .that they had been committing Zina. The learned State counsel does not controvert this contention and states that the prosecution is not in possession of any direct evidence regarding the allegation of Zina. In the circumstances, the petitioners are admitted to bail in the sum of Rs . 20, each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Assistant Commissioner, Bhalwal. M.Y.M. Bail granted.