PCRLJ 1995

Criminal Miscellaneous No (PLP)

GHULAM MUHAMMAD — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent

Jurisdiction / Court
Lahore
Decided Date
1994-October-9
Honorable Judges
N/A
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation Criminal Miscellaneous No (PLP)
Forum / Court Lahore
Bench Members N/A
Parties GHULAM MUHAMMAD — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in Criminal Miscellaneous No (PLP)?

This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case Criminal Miscellaneous No (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: Criminal Miscellaneous No (PLP) (GHULAM MUHAMMAD — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Representation

  • Sardar Muhammad Latif Khan Khosa for Petitioner.

Headnotes / Summary

S. 497

Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), S.10

Bail, grant `of

Accused sought bail on ground that in the last investigation he was found to be innocent on his plea of alibi

Accused in earlier three investigations was found to be real culprit and plea of alibi was raised belatedly by accused and was not based on sound material

Mere fact that in the last investigation, accused was found to be innocent on basis of his plea of alibi, would not entitle him to concession of bail when in earlier three investigations he was found to be guilty.

Judgment & Decree

Sardar Muhammad Latif Khan Khosa for Petitioner. Maqsood Ahmad Khan for the State. This is the second petition for grant of bail in a case registered against the petitioner vide F.I.R. No.75, dated 27-12-1993 for an offence under section 10 of Ordinance 7 of 1979 at Police Station Dhulewala, Tehsil Kaloorkot, District Bhakkar. The earlier petition (Criminal Miscellaneous No.2146/B of 1994) was dismissed on merits vide order, dated 24-5-1994.

2. The petitioner's learned counsel strenuously urged that the petitioner was found to be innocent in the last investigation conducted by Amir Ali, D.S.P., Bhakkar on the basis of the petitioner's plea of alibi. In this connection, the Investigating Officer, recorded Zimni No.35, dated 18-7-1994. According to the learned counsel, the case qua petitioner's culpability requires further probe and inquiry. He further submits that the offence was actually committed by Ghulam Shabbir with whom Mst. Razia Bibi had illicit relations but she falsely implicated the present petitioner.

3. On the other hand, learned State counsel submits that in the earlier three investigations, the first conducted by Mahmood Ahmad Khan, D.S.P. Kaloor Kot, the second by Sardar Ali, D.S.P., Bhakkar and the third by Qamar Ali, D.S.P., C.I.A. Bhakkar, the petitioner was found to be the real culprit. He submits that the plea of alibi was raised belatedly and was not based on sound material. Lastly, he submits that the trial had already commenced in the Court of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bhakkar, Camp at Kaloor Kot and that the prosecution evidence was going to be recorded on 11-10-1994.

4. Prima facie, there is sufficient material on the record to connect the petitioner with the commission of the offence. Mst. Razia Bibi, the victim has directly levelled the allegation of Zina-bil-Jabr against the petitioner in the F.I.R. as well as in her statement recorded under section 164 of the Cr.P.C. The medico-legal report of Mst. Razia Bibi shows that she had received an injury on her nose which, prima facie, indicates some sort of resistance on her part to foil the attempt of taking her forcibly in the vacant house. The report of the chemical examiner being positive, supports the allegation that she was subjected to sexual intercourse. In the earlier bail petitions filed in this Court and before the Sessions Judge, no argument was raised on the basis of the petitioner's plea of alibi. Similarly, the pica of alibi was neither specifically raised nor the supportive evidence produced before the three Investigating Officers referred to in Para.3 above. The mere fact that in the last investigation, the petitioner was found to be innocent on the basis of his plea of alibi does not entitle him to concession of bail when in the earlier three investigations he was found to be guilty.

4. For the foregoing discussion, I do not find any merit in this petition which is dismissed. H.B.T./G-258/L Petition dismissed.