YLR 2002

2002 PLP 1165 (YLR)

MUHAMMAD MUZAMMAL‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent

Jurisdiction / Court
Lahore
Decided Date
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 1139‑B of 2000, decided on 1st March, 2002.
Honorable Judges
Khawaja Muhammad Sharif, J
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2002 PLP 1165 (YLR)
Forum / Court Lahore
Bench Members Khawaja Muhammad Sharif, J
Parties MUHAMMAD MUZAMMAL‑‑‑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 2002 PLP 1165 (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 2002 PLP 1165 (YLR)?

The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Khawaja Muhammad Sharif, J.

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

Cite this legal precedent as: 2002 PLP 1165 (YLR) (MUHAMMAD MUZAMMAL‑‑‑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

  • Safdar Javaid Chaudhry for Petitioner.
  • Case was registered on the statement of Nabila Kausar the alleged abductee in this case on 3010‑2000 while the occurrence had taken place on 12‑2‑2000. According to the statement of Nabila Kausar, the victim in this case, she was present at bus, stop on 12‑2‑2000 in order to go to college, a white colour car came there in which Muzammal (present petitioner), Maqboolan Bibi and Ishrat Bibi were present. Maqboolan Bibi and Irshat Bibi forcibly boarded her, Muzammal drove the car and threatened her to keep quiet, thereafter, Muzammal took her in the house of Muhammad Boota at Nasirabad and confined her in the house of Boota, for there days, Muzammal had been committing Zina with her, thereafter, Muzammal and Salamat took her in the office of an Advocate in the area of Lahore Cantt obtained the signature of complainant on Nikah Nama and Stamp Paper forcibly. On the next day, present petitioner took her to Chak No.452/GB, where father of present petitioner told her that she cannot go any where. On 2.8‑2‑2000, maternal uncle of complainant Khalid Pervez, Muhammad Saeed, maternal grandmother Sitara Bibi and Rana Khalil reached the house of Muzammal and took the complainant with them.

Headnotes / Summary

‑‑‑‑S.497(2)‑‑‑Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), Ss. 10/11‑‑ Bail‑‑‑Delay of eight months in lodging the F.I.R. by the abductee or her father had made the prosecution case doubtful‑‑‑Suits for jactitation of marriage and restitution of conjugal rights were pending between the parties‑‑‑Case against accused was found to be false by the police‑‑‑Further inquiry as contemplated under S. 497 (2), Cr. P. C. was required in the case‑‑‑Accused was admitted to bail in circumstances. Sh. Mimi Ahmad for the State.

Judgment & Decree

Safdar Javaid Chaudhry for Petitioner. Sh. Mimi Ahmad for the State. Case was registered on the statement of Nabila Kausar the alleged abductee in this case on 3010‑2000 while the occurrence had taken place on 12‑2‑2000. According to the statement of Nabila Kausar, the victim in this case, she was present at bus, stop on 12‑2‑2000 in order to go to college, a white colour car came there in which Muzammal (present petitioner), Maqboolan Bibi and Ishrat Bibi were present. Maqboolan Bibi and Irshat Bibi forcibly boarded her, Muzammal drove the car and threatened her to keep quiet, thereafter, Muzammal took her in the house of Muhammad Boota at Nasirabad and confined her in the house of Boota, for there days, Muzammal had been committing Zina with her, thereafter, Muzammal and Salamat took her in the office of an Advocate in the area of Lahore Cantt obtained the signature of complainant on Nikah Nama and Stamp Paper forcibly. On the next day, present petitioner took her to Chak No.452/GB, where father of present petitioner told her that she cannot go any where. On 2.8‑2‑2000, maternal uncle of complainant Khalid Pervez, Muhammad Saeed, maternal grandmother Sitara Bibi and Rana Khalil reached the house of Muzammal and took the complainant with them.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is a delay of 8 months in lodging the F.I.R., that Nabila Kausar, the complainant/victim is paternal cousin of the petitioner, that they entered into nikah according to their own freewill, that suit for restitution of conjugal right and jactitation of marriage are also pending before the concerned Court, that present case has been found false by Abdul Razzaq A.S.I. vide his Zimnee dated 20‑9‑2001.

3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State submits that petitioner is named in the F. I. R., offence falls within the ambit of section 497(1), Cr.P.C. and he is not entitled for the grant of bail.

4. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. According to the prosecution case, Mst. Nabila Kausar went to her house on 28‑2‑2000 but till 30‑10‑2000 no case was registered either on her statement or on the statement of her father, this delay of eight months creates doubt in the prosecution, case. Moreover, suit for jactitation of Marriage and restitution of conjugal rights are also pending between the parties. I have also myself gone through the case diary date 20‑9‑2001 which has been incorporated by Abdul Razzaq A.S.I. According to his findings the case was found to be false.

5. After having heard the learned counsel for the parties and going through the case diary mentioned above I am fully satisfied that this is a case which is covered by subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C., therefore, this petition is accepted. Petitioner is allowed bail subject to furnishing bail bonds to the tune of Rs.30,000 (thirty thousand) with one surety in the like‑mount to the satisfaction of trial Court. N.H.Q./M‑1077/L Bail allowed.