2010 PLP 693 (YLR)
ALI GOHAR — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2010 PLP 693 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Ismail Bhutto, J |
| Parties | ALI GOHAR — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2010 PLP 693 (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 2010 PLP 693 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: Muhammad Ismail Bhutto, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2010 PLP 693 (YLR) (ALI GOHAR — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Headnotes / Summary
S.497(2)
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.365-B, 367-A & 382
Kidnapping, abducting or inducing woman to compel for marriage etc. kidnapping or abducting in order to subject person to unnatural lust and theft after preparation made for causing death, hurt or restraint in order to the committing of the theft
No role had been assigned to accused except his presence at the place of incident with pistol
Specific allegation of abduction of lady and taking of golden ornaments and other articles was levelled against the co-accused--Investigating Officer had let off four persons so also abductee had not implicated accused/applicant for the abduc tion and taking away golden ornaments--Accused having made out case for further inquiry, was admitted to bail. Manzoor Hussain Larik for Applicant. Dareshani Ali Haider Ada for the State.
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD ISMAIL BHUTTO, J.
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that there is delay of two days in lodgment of the F.I.R. in which complainant has stated that his sister Mst. Waheeda is wife of Nazir was staying in their house. Nine accused persons with weapons entered into their house and one Khalid forcibly abducted Mst. Waheeda while others namely Rafiq and Mumtaz took out golden ornaments, cash and clothes from the Almirah and went away. He further submits that on 27-1-2009 abductee was recovered and on the same day her 164 Cr.P.C. statement was recorded before Magistrate, wherein she has not levelled any specific allegation against the applicant but disclosed that he was armed with pistol. Five real brothers were involved in this case. I.O. has let off four persons. He further submits that statement of abductee shows that co-accused Khalid and two others have forcibly committed Zina upon her. Applicant was arrested on 30-4-2009 and since challan has been submitted, applicant is no more required for any investigation. Learned State counsel opposed for the grant of bail on the ground that applicant along with co-accused entered into the house of complainant and forcibly abducted young lady of 20 years. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the material available on record. It is an admitted position that no role has been assigned to the applicant except his presence at the place of incident with pistol. The specific allegation of abduction of lady and taking of golden ornaments and other articles is against co-accused Khalid, Rafiq Mumtaz. It is also an admitted fact that I.O. has let off four persons so also abductee has not implicated the present applicant for her abduction and taking away golden ornaments. In view of above, I am of the considered view that the applicant has made out case for further enquiry. Bail application stands allowed. The applicant is granted bail subject to his furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs.300,000 (three lacs) with PR bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of trial Court. H.B.T./A-150/K Bail granted.