2005 PLP 266(1) (YLR)
ZULFIQAR ALI Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2005 PLP 266(1) (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | Ata-ur-Rehman, J |
| Parties | ZULFIQAR ALI Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2005 PLP 266(1) (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 2005 PLP 266(1) (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: Ata-ur-Rehman, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2005 PLP 266(1) (YLR) (ZULFIQAR 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
Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), Ss. 11/16
Prosecutrix, who was examined under S.164, Cr. P. C. had not involved accused in the alleged offence
Co-accused on that ground was granted bail by High Court
Case of accused being identical to case of co -accused, in view of rule of consistency accused was also allowed bail. Abdul Rasool Abbasi for Applicant. Miss Parveen Chachar State Counsel.
Judgment & Decree
S.497
Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), Ss. 11/16
Prosecutrix, who was examined under S.164, Cr. P. C. had not involved accused in the alleged offence
Co-accused on that ground was granted bail by High Court
Case of accused being identical to case of co -accused, in view of rule of consistency accused was also allowed bail. Abdul Rasool Abbasi for Applicant. Miss Parveen Chachar State Counsel. This application has been moved by Zulfiqar Ali who is involved in Crime No.52 of 2004, Police Station, Dadu under section 11/16 Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979. The brief facts of the case are that, on 27-3-2004, complainant and his relative after having dinner slept and woke up on the barking of dogs when they saw in the light of bulb Farhan, Jameel and Zulfiqar armed with deadly weapons. Accused by dragging taken away the sister of complainant and the complainant party due to scare of weapons could not track them. The complainant party tried to get back their sister but could not succeed, hence the F.I.R. was lodged. Heard learned counsel for the application as well as learned State Counsel. The prosecutrix was examined under section 164, Cr.P.C. where she has not involved the present applicant in the alleged offence. On this ground co-accused Farhan has been granted bail by this Court on 8-5-2004 in Cr.B.A. No.408 of 2004. The case of present applicant is identical to the case of Farhan and keeping in view the rule of consistency the present applicant is also allowed bail on his furnishing surety in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 and P.R. bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court. H. B. T./Z-11/K Bail granted.