2002 PLP 3601 (YLR)
MUHAMMAD NAVEED and 2 others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 2002 PLP 3601 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Riaz Kayani, J |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD NAVEED and 2 others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2002 PLP 3601 (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 2002 PLP 3601 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Riaz Kayani, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2002 PLP 3601 (YLR) (MUHAMMAD NAVEED and 2 others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ch. Muhammad Hanif Khatana for Petitioners.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑S. 497‑‑‑Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), Ss. 10/11‑‑Bail, grant of in her statement under S.161, Cr. P. C. had levelled allegation of Zina‑bil‑Jabr committed on her by accused‑‑‑Prosecution witnesses‑had stated that then had seen accused taking away abductee in a car towards another city‑‑ Medical Report had substantiated statement of abductee that she was subjected to intercourse ‑‑‑Sufficient material was on record to connect accused with commission of offence punishment of which fell within prohibitory clause of S.497(1), Cr.P.C.‑‑ Accused, in circumstances could not be enlarged on bail. Abdul Rasheed Monan for the State. Ch. Ijaz Akbar for the Complainant.
Judgment & Decree
Abdul Rasheed Monan for the State. Ch. Ijaz Akbar for the Complainant. Petitioners seek bail in F.I.R. No.54 of 1999 registered with Police Post Kot Nainan, District Narowal, on 8‑3‑1999, under sections 10/11 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance VII of 1979.
2. Briefly the prosecution version narrated in the complaint authored by Liaqat Ali is that his daughter. Shamim Akhtar was taken on the pretext of shopping by Mst. Nargas Bibi wife of Muhammad Hussain to Shakar Garb City, having not returned by the evening, he made inquiry and found out from, the witness that, the petitioner had taken his daughter in a white car and was going towards Lahore. The abductee not having been recovered the inference drawn was that she was abducted for the purpose of Zina.
3. Post Arrest Bail was rejected by Additional Sessions Judge Shakar Garh on 15‑7‑1999.
4. Learned counsel has contended that the local S.H.O. and then the D.S.P Sadar Narowal have found the petitioners to be innocent and have put the whole blame on one Shabbir Ahmad driver by profession. It is stated that Mst. Shamim. prosecutrix eloped with Shabbir Ahmad driver with whom she had amorous relations and that the petitioners have been roped in due to prior grudge with the father of the prosecutrix.
5. Conversely learned counsel for the complainant has opposed the grant of bail.
6. I have considered the arguments of the respective counsels and have gone through the, record. Mst. Shamim Akhtar in her statement under section 161, Cr.P.C. levelled the allegation of Zina‑bil‑Jabr committed with her by the petitioner. Munir Ahmad and Muhammad Rafique witnesses named in the F.I.R. have stated that they saw the petitioners taking away Shamim in a car towards Lahore. The medical report substantiates the statement of Shamim Akhtar that she was subjected to intercourse. For the present there is sufficient material on record to connect the petitioners with the commission of offence whose punishment falls within the prohibitory clause. At present I am not inclined to enlarge the petitioners on bail for the reasons given above, therefore, the application being without any merit is dismissed. H.B.T./M‑1228/L Bail appeal dismissed.