1980 P Cr (PLP)
DAYA‑Applicant Versus MUHAMMAD SALEEM AND 2 OTHERS‑Respondents
| Citation | 1980 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | DAYA‑Applicant Versus MUHAMMAD SALEEM AND 2 OTHERS‑Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1980 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 1980 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: 1980 P Cr (PLP) (DAYA‑Applicant Versus MUHAMMAD SALEEM AND 2 OTHERS‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ghulam Sawar Chohan for Respondents Nos. 1 and 2.
Headnotes / Summary
‑S. 497 (5) and Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), S. 10‑Bail, cancellation of‑Abductee, a married Hindu lady, leaving K for M of her own free will‑Lady converting to Islam and marrying accused with her own choice‑Whether, abductee's con version to Islam automatically dissolved her previous marriage with Hindu (Quaere)‑‑Previous marriage, if stood dissolved, in circum stances of case offence under S. 10 nut made out‑Held, such being an important question of law depending on facts of case, bail in circumstances not cancelled.
Judgment & Decree
The case against the respondents 1 and 2 has been challaned in the Court for offence under section 10 of Ordinance No. VII of 1979, the offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance. They were allowed bail by the learned VIIth Additional Sessions Judge, Karachi by his order dated 27‑12‑1979. Subsequently another application was filed for cancellation of bail, allowed to the respondents, which came up for hearing before the learned Vth Additional Sessions Judge Karachi, which was rejected by the order dated 13‑1‑1980. The application for cancellation of bail has been repeated here under section 497(5) of Cr. P. C. Mst. Luxmi is aged about 18/19 years. She was first 3 Hindu and was married to one Shyam, also a Hindu. Due to certain differences with her husband, she came to stay with her father Daya and her mother, in Sultanabad. She developed a relationship with respondent No. 1 Mohammad Saleem. It appears that Muhammad Saleem left Karachi for Multan followed by Mst. Luxmi, where she embraced Islam and was later on married to the respondent No.
1. She is said to be having a document in respect of her conversion to Islam and marriage by Nikah to respondent No.
1. At the time of her arrest, Mst. Luxmi had made a statement before the Magistrate, supporting the same facts of her conversion to Islam and marriage, of her own free will, with the respondent No.
1. It is admitted position that Mst. Luxmi had left for Multan of he own free will. She also got converted to Islam and was married to respondent No. 1 with her own choice. The material point in this case is of con version of Mst. Luxmi, who as a Hindu, was already married and on her conversion to Islam, whether her previous marriage, stood dissolved, without any decree or order of the Court of law. If her conversion to Islam, automatically dissolved her previous marriage with the Hindu, what would be its effect under the circumstances of the case. If the previous marriage with a Hindu, stood dissolved, after her conversion to Islam, then her sub sequent marriage with the respondent No. 1, would not be an offence under section 10 of Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, as J alleged. Since this is an important question of law depending upon the facts of this case, Mr. Nazir Alam appearing for A.‑G. for the State does not support the . application for cancellation of bail. The application is accord ingly dismissed. Petition dismissed.