2005 PLP 1078 (MLD)
ALLAH BAKHSH and others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 2005 PLP 1078 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Nazir Ahmed Siddiqui, J |
| Parties | ALLAH BAKHSH and others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2005 PLP 1078 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2005 PLP 1078 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Nazir Ahmed Siddiqui, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2005 PLP 1078 (MLD) (ALLAH BAKHSH and others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Rasheed Afzal Cheema for Petitioners.
Headnotes / Summary
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑ ‑‑‑S. 498‑‑‑Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), S. 10(3)‑‑‑Pre‑arrest bail, grant of‑‑‑Accused lady was in advanced stage of family way and that was not seriously refuted either by State Counsel or the complainant‑‑‑Even otherwise, there was allegation of abetment against accused with regard to commission of offence allegedly committed by the co‑accused‑‑‑Interim bail already granted to accused, was confirmed, in circumstances. Sardar Zafar Iqbal Khan for the Complainant. Sh. Javaid Iqbal for the State.
Judgment & Decree
Petitioner Mst. Haseena seeks pre‑arrest bail in a case registered vide F.I.R. No.85/2004, dated 18‑3‑2004 under section 10(3) of Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance VII of 1979 at Police Station City, Sadiqabad District Rahim Yar Khan.
2. At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is in advanced stage of family way and this is not seriously refuted either by learned counsel for the State or the, complainant. Even otherwise, there is allegation of abetment against the petitioner with regard to the commission of the offence allegedly committed by her co‑accused namely Allah Bakhsh.
3. In view of the above, this petition is allowed and the interim bail of the petitioner already granted to her vide order dated 31‑5‑2004 of this Court, is hereby confirmed. H.B.T./A‑445/L Bail confirmed.