YLR 2006

2006 PLP 1952 (YLR)

SHER MUHAMMAD — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent

Jurisdiction / Court
Lahore
Decided Date
Criminal Miscellaneous No.7622-B of 2005, decided on 2nd, December 2005.
Honorable Judges
Syed Shabbar Raza Rizvi, J
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2006 PLP 1952 (YLR)
Forum / Court Lahore
Bench Members Syed Shabbar Raza Rizvi, J
Parties SHER MUHAMMAD — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
Primary Law Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2006 PLP 1952 (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 2006 PLP 1952 (YLR)?

The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Syed Shabbar Raza Rizvi, J.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 2006 PLP 1952 (YLR) (SHER MUHAMMAD — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Representation

  • Mian Humayoon Aslam for Petitioner.

Headnotes / Summary

S.497(2)

Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), Ss.10 & 11

Bail, grant of

Further inquiry

Allegation against accused was that he managed to elope or take away daughter of complainant

Contention of accused was that he formally entered into Nikah with daughter of complainant and did not commit any offence

Accused also submitted that Nikah Nama was formally registered with the concerned Union Council and in that regard he had referred to a certificate issued by the Secretary of the Union Council

Certificates issued by Secretary, Union Council, had been produced by both the parties

Suits for jactitation of marriage and for restitution of conjugal rights, had been filed by accused and daughter of complainant against each other

All that had made its case of further inquiry

Accused, who was behind the bars since his arrest, was not required for investigation purpose any more

Whether version of accused was correct or that of the complainant, would be decided by the trial Court

Accused was admitted to bail, in circumstances. Miss Farina Butt for the State with Rehmat, S.-I.

Judgment & Decree

SYED SHABBAR RAZA RIZVI, J.

The petitioner has filed this bail application in F.I.R. No.195 of 2004, dated 15-9-2004, under section 10/11 of Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance VII, 1979 at Police Station, Khushab. Briefly, according to the F.I.R., the complainant married to widow of his brother who had children from her previous marriage with brother of the complainant. Mst. Khalida Naveed, daughter of complainant's wife from the previous wedlock developed illicit relations with petitioner, eventually petitioner managed to elope or take away Mst. Khalida. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner formally entered into Nikah with Mst. Khalida, therefore, he did not commit any offence. He also submits that Nikah Nama was formally registered with the concerned Union Council, in this regard he refers to a certificate issued by Secretary Union Council. A certified copy of the Nikah Nama has also been produced by the petitioner. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the State submits that the Secretary Union Council has stated that Nikah Nama was not registered with him, similarly, Nikah Khawan also denied that he performed Nikah between petitioner and Mst. Khalida. I have heard both the learned counsel and considered their respective contentions. The certificates issued by Zafar Ullah, Secretary Union Council have been produced by both the parties. The suits for jactitation of marriage and for restitution of conjugal rights have been filed by the petitioner and Mst. Khalida against each other. All this, makes present case a case of further inquiry. The petitioner is also behind the bars since 17-3-2005. He is not 1 required for investigation purpose. Whether version of petitioner is correct or of the complainant, that would be decided by the trial Court. In view of the above and foregoing reasons, this bail application is allowed subject to furnishing surety bonds by the petitioner in the amount of Rs.50,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court or Illaqa Magistrate. H.B.T./S-504/L??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Bail granted.