2004 P Cr (PLP)
Mst. SONI — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2004 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | Mst. SONI — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2004 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2004 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: 2004 P Cr (PLP) (Mst. SONI — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- I have heard Mr. Manzoor Ahmed Junejo, learned counsel appearing on behalf of applicant/accused, Mr. Haji Abdullah Memon learned counsel on behalf of complainant. He has opposed the bail plea of applicant/accused. I have also heard Mr. Moula Bux Khoso learned counsel appearing on behalf of Advocate-General for the State. The latter conceded to the grant of bail.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497
Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), Ss. 10, 11 & 14--Bail
Accused, a lady, had sought bail on the sole ground of pregnancy
Report of the Civil Surgeon, Civil Hospital, revealed that the accused was in advanced stage of pregnancy
Accused was continuously in custody for the last about four months
Judgment & Decree
"Phone No.9310127, Office of the Civil Surgeon, Civil Hospital, Sukkur. No. CMS/2003/UTP/9811/dated the 12th July, 2003. To The Assistant Registrar, Honourable High Court of Sindh, Sukkur. Subject. Medical examination of Mst. Soni daughter of Mukhtiar. Reference Honourable Court letter No.3315, dated 7-7-2003. I have the honour to submit that the above named lady (UTP) was examined by the Gynecologist of this hospital Dr. Nigar Vatima on 12-7-2003 who opined that she is pregnant of about 24 Weeks and her E.D.D. (Expected date of delivery) will be 2nd week of October, 2003 and advised for treatment. (Sd.) Civil Surgeon, Civil Hospital, Sukkur. Copy to the Superintendent Central Prison-II, Sukkur for information with reference to his office letter No.UTP/1617, dated 11-7-2003. (Sd.) Civil Surgeon, Civil Hospital, Sukkur." In the case of Mst. Shamim Akhtar v. The State reported in 1991 PCr.LJ 1079 a Bench of. this Court granted bail to a lady accused wh6 was at advance stage of pregnancy. In the case of Mst. Zarina v. The State reported in 1991 MLD p.518 a Bench of Lahore High Court granted bail to a lady accused involved in a case under section 10 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979. The relevant observations are reproduced hereinbelow:-- "... on the enforcement of Qisas and Diyat Ordinance, it is no more possible to send or keep a pregnant or female accused carrying suckling babies till the expiry of the period of. In Islam punishment cannot be executed on mother (in a family way) till expiry of the period of of the child. Then how can she be sent to jail at a age (during trial) when she is presumed to be innocent. The Presiding Officers have to bear in mind the prevalent circumstances of our society and other human reactions and consideration and it is with this purpose that a discretionary jurisdiction to allow bail in a suitable case is vested in Courts. I feel that it is better to err in releasing female accused carrying suckling baby on bail than in remanding her child alongwith her to jail during trial." Resultantly looking towards the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, applicant/ accused is granted bail in the sum of Rs.50,000 and P.R. Bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. N.H.Q./S.-342/K Bail allowed.