2001 P Cr (PLP)
HABIB ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 2001 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | HABIB ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2001 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2001 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: 2001 P Cr (PLP) (HABIB ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Muhammad Naveed Hashmi for Petitioner Azmat Ali Taga for the State.
Headnotes / Summary
S.497‑‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.420, 468 & 471‑‑.‑Bail, grant of‑‑‑Accused were named as witnesses in Nikahnama allegedly performed between the daughter of the complainant and the main accused‑‑‑Prosecution case was that the Nikahnama was false and bogus‑‑‑Daughter of the complainant in her statement under 5.161, Cr.P.C. had denied the marriage with the main accused who had not been arrested ‑‑‑Nikah Khawan had already been granted pre‑arrest bail‑‑‑Section 420, P.P.C. was bailable while none of the offences attracted the prohibitory clause of S.497, Cr.P.C.‑‑ Main accused having not been arrested there was no likelihood of early commencement of the trial‑‑‑Police record showed that daughter of the complainant had also sworn an affidavit earlier admitting her marriage with the accused‑‑‑Accused were never involved in any criminal case previously and further detention of the accused in jail could not serve any useful purpose‑‑‑Bail was granted to the accused in circumstances.
Judgment & Decree
Habib son of Ghulam Rasool and Allah Bukhsh son of Karim Bukhsh, petitioners, have sought their post‑arrest bail through Criminal Miscellaneous No.1273/13 of 2001 and Rab Nawaz son of Habib Khan, has sought his post‑arrest bail through Criminal Miscellaneous No.1482/13 of 2001. Since both these petitions arise out from the same F.I.R., therefore, the same are being disposed of through this single order.
2. A case was registered against the petitioners vide F.I.R. No.47 of 2001, dated 1‑2‑2001, under sections 420/468/471, P.P.C. at Police Station Kot Mubarik, District D.G. Khan.
3. The precise allegation against the petitioners is that they were named as witnesses in a Nikahnama, which was allegedly performed between Mst. Tasleem Anjum and Muhammad Ifrahim. According to the said Nikahnama, the marriage had taken place on 8‑11‑1997 and was registered on the same day. The case of the prosecution is that the abovesaid Nikahnama is fake and bogus, therefore, the complainant, who is the father of Mst. Tasleem Anjum, reported the matter to the police.
4. Mst. Tasleem Anjum in her statement under section 161, Cr.P.C. recorded on 1‑2‑2001 also denied her marriage with Muhammad Ifrahim, the main accused.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record. The perusal of the police record shows that Mst. Tasleem Anjum daughter of the complainant has sworn an affidavit on 6‑11‑1997 wherein she had admitted her marriage with Muhammad Ifrahim. It has also been noticed that Nikah Khawan has already been granted pre‑arrest bail. Section 420, P.P.C. is bailable while none of the offences attract the prohibitory clause. The investigation qua the petitioners has been completed. The police has failed to arrest Muhammad Ifrahim the main accused so far, which clearly shows that there is no likelihood of early commencement of the trial. The petitioners were never involved in any criminal case previously. Their further detention in jail would not serve any useful purpose.
6. For what has been discussed above, I am inclined to grant bail to the petitioners, subject to their tendering bail bonds in the sum of Rs. twenty thousand each, with one surety each, in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court. H.B.T./H‑49/L Bail granted