2004 PLP 768 (SCMR)
MAQBOOL AHMED ‑‑‑Appellant Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 2004 PLP 768 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Justice Nazim Hussain Siddiqui, Chairman, Justices Javed Iqbal, Tanvir Ahmed Khan, Dr. Allama Khalid Mehmud and Dr. Rashid Ahmad Jullundhari, Members |
| Parties | MAQBOOL AHMED ‑‑‑Appellant Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2004 PLP 768 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2004 PLP 768 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Justice Nazim Hussain Siddiqui, Chairman, Justices Javed Iqbal, Tanvir Ahmed Khan, Dr. Allama Khalid Mehmud and Dr. Rashid Ahmad Jullundhari, Members.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2004 PLP 768 (SCMR) (MAQBOOL AHMED ‑‑‑Appellant Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- M. Zaman Bhatti, Advocate Supreme Court for Appellant.
- Date of hearing: 10th December, 2003.
- Malik Ainul Haq, Senior Advocate Supreme Court for the State.
- 3. The appellant then lodged an appeal in the Federal Shariat Court on 2‑4‑2002 (Criminal Appeal No.88‑L of 2002). Learned counsel for the appellant Mr. Muhammad Iqbal Khan Khichi, Advocate appeared for the convict in the Federal Shariat Court. The learned counsel Mian Abdul Qayoom Anjum advocated the State. The Federal Shariat Court maintained the sentence but taking in view the position of his two children whereas mother was not available anywhere and declared absconder, it was reduced to 2‑1/2 years with a fine of Rs.1,000. He was allowed benefit of section 382‑B, Cr.P.C.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment dated 28‑5‑2002 of the Federal Shariat Court passed in Criminal Appeal No.88‑L of 2002). ‑‑‑‑S. 10(2)‑‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.468 & 471‑‑‑Appraisal of evidence‑‑‑Accused had committed a very serious crime of enticing a married woman and then claiming to have married her‑‑‑Marriage‑deed produced by the accused before the Federal Shariat Court was not found to be genuine‑‑‑Unfortunate woman was not available and was considered to have been killed‑‑‑Case against accused was well proved‑‑ Federal Shariat Court had already taken a lenient view in the matter of sentence‑‑‑Appeal filed by accused was dismissed accordingly. Malik Ainul Haq, Senior Advocate Supreme Court for the State.
Judgment & Decree
Malik Ainul Haq, Senior Advocate Supreme Court for the State. Date of hearing: 10th December, 2003. DR. ALLAMA KHALID MEHMUD (MEMBER.)‑‑‑F. I. R. No. 178 of 2000 in this case was registered on 8‑8‑2000 under sections 419, 420, 468, 471, 494/34, P.P.C. and under sections 16, 10(2), Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979, at Police Station Khanewal Kohna. The case was tried by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Khanewal and charge‑sheet was served upon the appellant on 11‑10‑2001; and he was given a thorough trial.
2. The learned Judge held appellant Maqbool Ahmed guilty of the offence and convicted him under section 468 of P.P.C. and sentenced him to suffer R.I. for one year with fine of Rs.1,000 under section 471 of P.P.C. to suffer R.I. for one year alongwith a fine of Rs.1,000 and under section 10(2), Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979 to suffer R.I. for four years with a fine of Rs.5,000 on 11‑3‑2002. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently.
3. The appellant then lodged an appeal in the Federal Shariat Court on 2‑4‑2002 (Criminal Appeal No.88‑L of 2002). Learned counsel for the appellant Mr. Muhammad Iqbal Khan Khichi, Advocate appeared for the convict in the Federal Shariat Court. The learned counsel Mian Abdul Qayoom Anjum advocated the State. The Federal Shariat Court maintained the sentence but taking in view the position of his two children whereas mother was not available anywhere and declared absconder, it was reduced to 2‑1/2 years with a fine of Rs.1,
000. He was allowed benefit of section 382‑B, Cr.P.C.
4. The appellant then lodged a jail petition in this Court and leave was granted to him on 23‑4‑2003. Today, we have, heard Mr. Muhammad Zaman Bhatti, counsel for the appellant and Mr. Malik Ainul Haq for the State.
5. The appellant committed a very serious crime of enticing a married woman and then claiming that he married her and it is well proved. The two marriage deeds were produced before the Federal Shariat Court one of 28‑1‑1994 and other of 11‑11‑1997 and the latter was not believed and was not found genuine. The unfortunate woman is not available and is considered to have been killed. Learned Sessions Court has declared P.O. to her vide order dated 21‑9‑2001.
6. The counsel for the appellant requested for mercy over his two children. The Federal Shariat Court has already observed this position B and reduced the sentence from 4‑1/2 years to 2‑1/2 years and the fine from Rs.5,000 to Rs.1,000.
7. The sentence given by the Federal Shariat Court is maintained. The convict will complete it in April, 2004 if he pays prescribed fine in time. The appeal is dismissed. N.H.Q./M‑14/S Appeal dismissed.