2002 PLP 1008 (MLD)
SIBTAIN alias BHOLA‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 2002 PLP 1008 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Farrukh Mahmud, J |
| Parties | SIBTAIN alias BHOLA‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2002 PLP 1008 (MLD)?
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 1008 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Muhammad Farrukh Mahmud, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2002 PLP 1008 (MLD) (SIBTAIN alias BHOLA‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Altaf Ibrahim Qureshi for Petitioner:
- Date of hearing: 10th October, 2001.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑S.497(2)‑‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 377/342‑‑‑Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), S.12‑‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑‑Matter was reported to police after four months and eleven days without plausible explanation for the delay‑‑‑Medical examination of victim had belied all the allegations levelled in F.I.R.‑‑‑Allegations against accused needing further probe and inquiry, his case fell within ambit of S.497(2), Cr.P.C, entitling him for grant of bail. Raja Sultan Khuram for the State.
Judgment & Decree
Altaf Ibrahim Qureshi for Petitioner: Raja Sultan Khuram for the State. Date of hearing: 10th October, 2001. Sibtain alias Bhola son of Talib Hussain, petitioner through the instant petition has sought his post‑arrest bail in a case F.I.R. No. 15 of 2001 registered at Police Station City Sahiwal, on 19‑1‑2001, for offences under section 12 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979, read with sections 377/342, P. P. C.
2. It has been stated in the F.I.R. that Muhammad Majid son of the first informant had been taken along by the petitioner on the night in between 8/9‑9‑2000 at about 3‑00 a.m. on the pretext that Muhammad Majid should help him in setting up some articles and subsequently Muhammad Majid was subjected to unnatural lust by the petitioner. The petitioner after his arrest in this case is behind the bars.
3. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record including the order passed by the learned trial Court. It hash been noticed that in this case the matter was reported to the police after four months and 11 days, without any plausible explanation. The occurrence has allegedly taken place on the night in between 8/9‑9‑2000 and the case was registered on 19‑1‑2001. Meanwhile, the alleged victim p, was examined by the Medical Officer, DHQ Hospital, Sahiwal, on 18‑9‑2000, (photocopy .of his report is available on the file as Mark‑A). The medical examination of the victim belied all the allegations levelled in the F.I.R. It was perhaps for that reasons no case was registered against the petitioner.
4. In these circumstances, the allegation against the petitioner needs further probe and inquiry and falls within the ambit of subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C., therefore, I allow this petition and grant bail to the petitioner, subject to his tendering bail bonds in the sum of rupees ten thousand, with one surety in the like amount to the I satisfaction of the trial Court. H.B.T./S‑404/L Bail granted