2008 P Cr (PLP)
SHABAN alias UMED ALI — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2008 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | SHABAN alias UMED ALI — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2008 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 2008 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2008 P Cr (PLP) (SHABAN alias UMED ALI — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497(2)
Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), Ss.11 & 16
F.I.R. was delayed by three days with no plausible explanation
Despite occurrence had taken place in presence of complainant where life and modesty of a woman might have involved, no attempt was made by the complainant to save said woman
No step was taken by the complainant to lodge F.I.R. and he, kept himself on the mercy of others with no reasonable excuse
Very conduct of the complainant had made the happening of the incident doubtful
Specific role had been assigned against other accused who was said to have been murdered
Accused along with other accomplices though was in the company of said other person, but neither he played any active role except entering in the house of the complainant, nor he was alleged to cause any injury to the complainant or the alleged abductee
Case, in circumstances appeared to be of further inquiry-Accused was admitted to bail, in circumstances.
Judgment & Decree
MRS. YASMIN ABBASEY, J.
Applicant Shaban alias Umed Ali, involved in Crime No.43 of 20007 registered at Police Station Dadu, under section 11/16, Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979, has moved this bail application.
2. Facts of the case are that on 15-2-2007 F.I.R. of this incident was registered by complainant Dhani Bux.that on 12-2-2007 at night time applicant along with Mst. Rasoolan, Mst. Shahidan, Ghulam Hussain Shah, Muneer Shah and Akhtar Shah came at his house duly armed. Accused Akhtar Shah dragged his daughter-in-law Mst. Yasmeen from his house and had abducted her in a Datsun car. According to complainant he at the first instance had reported the matter to Nek Mards, but having no. response from them, lodged the report on 15-2-2007.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant argued that very delay in lodging the F.I.R. shows the implication of the applicant and happening of incident as false and manipulated one. He further pointed out that incident is said to had taken place on 12-2-2007, whereas statements under section 161, Cr.P.C. of the witnesses were recorded on 22-2-2007, which itself is sufficient proof of mala fide investigation. Main accused Akhtar Shah is reported to have been murdered.
4. Learned State counsel has conceded to the grant of bail.
5. Admittedly, the FIR. is delayed by three days with no plausible explanation. The conduct of the complainant as shown is' also a strange one. In spite of occurrence of incident in his presence where life and modesty of a woman might involve no attempt was made by him to save her. Rather more no step was taken by him in time to lodge F.I.R. He kept himself on the mercy of others with no reasonable excuse. The very conduct of this complainant doubts to the happening of incident in the manner as alleged. Even otherwise specific role has been assigned only against Akhtar Shah who is said to have been murderers. This applicant along with other accomplices though was in the company of Akhtar Shah, but neither he played any active role except entering in the house of the complainant, nor is alleged to cause any injury to the complainant or to the abductee. In view of facts discussed it appears to be a case of further inquiry. The applicant is allowed to be enlarged on bail subject to his furnishing surety in the sum of Rs.5,00,000 (Rupees five lac) and P.R. bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. H.B.T./S-77/K Bail granted.