2003 P Cr (PLP)
Mst. SAKINA BIBI‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 2003 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Rustam Ali Malik, J |
| Parties | Mst. SAKINA BIBI‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2003 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 2003 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Rustam Ali Malik, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2003 P Cr (PLP) (Mst. SAKINA BIBI‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Nafeer A. Malik for Petitioner.
- Date of hearing: 11th June, 2002.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑S. 497(1), first and second provisos‑‑‑Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), Ss.10/13/14/18‑‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑ Accused had not been apprehended at the spot as she allegedly managed to escape‑‑‑Boy and girl found in the house of accused who allegedly were trying to commit Zina had already been admitted to bail‑‑‑Accused being a woman was also entitled to concession of bail on that ground as well‑‑‑Case of accused was one of further inquiry‑‑‑No useful purpose could be served by keeping accused in judicial lock‑up for an indefinite period‑‑‑Accused was admitted to bail. Muhammad Ali Dogar for the State.
Judgment & Decree
Nafeer A. Malik for Petitioner. Muhammad Ali Dogar for the State. Date of hearing: 11th June, 2002. This application for bail after arrest has been filed on behalf of Mst. Sakeena Bibi who is involved in a case arising out of F.I.R. No. 146 of 2001, registered on 14‑12‑2001 in Police Station Nankana Sahib, District Sheikhupura under sections 10/13/14/18 of Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979).
2. The F.I.R. was lodged by one Nazar Hussain, A.S.‑I. of Police Station Nankana Sahib City, stating therein, that on the receipt of an information that Mst. Sakina Bibi was running a brothel house in ?Mohallah Rehmania and that a girl was present in her house, Rasheed Ahmed, Rana Ali Muhammad Liaqat Ali and Shaukat Ali were deputed by him to keep a watch ‑on the house of Mst. Sakina Bibi. Rasheed Ahmed later informed him that a boy and girl were present in the Baithak of Mst. Sakina Bibi with the intention of committing Zina and could be apprehended if a raid was arranged. On the receipt of this information. The complainant alongwith the informant and other P. Ws, conducted a raid and opened the door of the Baithak and saw that the boy present therein was trying to commit Zina with the girl. Both of them were apprehended and they disclosed their names as Muhammad Arshad and, Mst. Seeman alias Naheed while Mst. Sakina Bibi petitioner managed to escape from the spot. Muhammad Arshad disclosed that he had hired the said girl for the purpose of Zina from Mst. Sakina Bibi, for an amount of Rs.1,
000. Hence the case as aforesaid was registered.
3. Arguments have been heard and, record perused.
4. Admittedly Mst. Sakina Bibi had not been apprehended at the pot as she had allegedly managed to escape. It has been pointed out that both Mst. Seeman and Muhammad Arshad have already been admitted to ail. It has also been argued that the petitioner, being a woman is also entitled to the concession of bail on the said ground as well. Even otherwise, the case of the petitioner is clearly one of further' enquiry. No useful purpose can be served by keeping the petitioner in the judicial lock‑up for an indefinite period. 4‑A. Under the circumstances, the petition is accepted and Mst. Sakina Bibi petitioner is admitted to bail in the sum of Rs.50,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. H.B.T./S‑548/L Bail granted.