2017 P Cr (PLP)
Syed ADNAN ASGHAR — Petitioner Versus The STATE and others — Respondents
| Citation | 2017 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | Syed ADNAN ASGHAR — Petitioner Versus The STATE and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2017 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 2017 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2017 P Cr (PLP) (Syed ADNAN ASGHAR — Petitioner Versus The STATE and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Muhammad Javaid-ur-Rehman Rana for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 376
Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), S. 5
Attempt to commit zina-bil-jabr
Complainant had alleged that accused attempted to commit zina-bil-jabr with her
Court had not noticed any act perpetuated by the accused to commit zina-bil-jabr
Offence alleged did not fall within prohibitory clause of S. 497, Cr.P.C.
Investigation was complete and to keep the accused behind bars would not advance prosecution case
Bail was allowed in circumstances. [Para. 5 of the judgment]
Judgment & Decree
MAZHAR IQBAL SIDHU, J.
Munazza Shaheen lives with her children in absence of her husband who reported to have been living at Italy and during night time she along with her children used to feel frights by cacodemons/incubuses as well as apparitions along with horrific voices, she contacted her husband in Italy and on his direction she contacted the petitioner for dispelling and exorcizing, the nightmares, who demanded Rs.30,000/- paid 10,000/- of the same, getting an opportunity petitioner attempted to commit zina-bil-jabr with her with warning not to be disclosed. Illatively complainant resorted to law.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has alleged falsity of the case motivated involvement of the petitioner and maintained that alleged offences are not constituted against him who is in prison since 15.05.2016 whereas investigation has been concluded, therefore, prima facie a case for the grant of bail is made out in favour of the petitioner.
3. Learned D.P.G has viewed the arguments and maintained that fictitious faith heelers illude simple and innocent women by swindling money up to their chastities, therefore, such like persons discriminately be denied discretionary relief to save innocent unlettered women.
4. Heard intently. Record perused.
5. As per prosecution's own case complainant remains-saved to unchaste and the court has not noticed any act perpetuated by the petitioner to commit zina-bil-jabr. Offence alleged does not fall within the prohibitory clause of section 497, Cr.P.C. albeit. Such like incidents are noticed by detestability yet the courts are bound to decide the cases without the question of parte-pris. Investigation is complete and to keep the petitioner behind the bars would not advance the prosecution case, therefore, instant application is accepted and petitioner is granted bail provided his submission of bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 2,00,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial court. WA/A-90/L Bail granted.