1982 P Cr (PLP)
SAJJA D HUSSAIN‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑Respondent
| Citation | 1982 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Munir Khan, J |
| Parties | SAJJA D HUSSAIN‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1982 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 1982 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Muhammad Munir Khan, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1982 P Cr (PLP) (SAJJA D HUSSAIN‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ashfaq Ahmad Khan for Petitioner.
- Date of hearing: 31 st May, 1981.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑ S. 498, Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 307/377/511 and Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), S. 18 Bail before arrest pressed on grounds that according to F. I. R. one unknown person dragged complainant into room, bolted same and started committing sodomy but not penetrated and discharged out side‑Held, grant of bail before arrest an exceptional matter meant to protect good name of citizens whose arrest humiliated in public‑Without expressing any opinion into merits of case, held,. not fit case for grant of bail before arrest. M. Sultan Alam for the State.
Judgment & Decree
Date of hearing: 31 st May, 1981. This is a petition for pre‑arrest bail in a case under section 307/ 377/511, P. P. C. and section 18 of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance. 1979, registered at Police Station Old Kotwali, Multan, on 23rd May,1981. In the F. I. R. it is stated that one unknown person had dragged Naveed Aslam complainant into a room ; bolted the same from inside ; gave him fist blows ; put him on a cot ; removed his Shalwar became naked sat on his back ; started committing sodomy ; did not penetrate and was discharged outside.
2. The Police Officer stated that during investigation he has collected evidence which connects the petitioner With the alleged crime. He states that he has recorded the statements of Sabghatullah and Muhammad Farooq and they have stated that just after the occurrence Naveed Aslam met them in the lane near the place of occurrence. In the meantime, the petitioner came there and on seeing him. Naveed Aslam pointed towards him that he was the man who had committed sodomy upon him.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the name of the petitioner is not mentioned in the First Information Report and even if for the sake of arguments the allegations against the petitioner are accepted at their face value, the case falls short of an attempt to commit sodomy.
4. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State has vehe mently opposed the bail. He submits that the alleged offence is heinous one and it is a clear case of attempt to commit sodomy and that not a fit ease for the grant of pre‑arrest bail.
5. I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties. Grant of pre‑arrest bail is an exceptional matter and is meant to protect the good name of the citizens, who arrest is humiliated in the public. Attempt to commit a crime conists of‑-- (i) intention to commit crime (ii) performance of some act towards the commission of crime ; and A (iii) failure to consummate its commission on account of circumstance beyond the control of the offender. Without expressing any opinion, lest it may prejudice the case of the either side, I am of the ‑view that it is not a fit case for, pre‑arrest bail. Petition dismissed.