Find a Lawyer

Criminal Miscellaneous No. 713-B of 1983/BWP decided on 30th August, 1883.

---S. 497--Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), Ss. 10 a 11--Bail--Bail refused to accused earlier when true facts not brought to notice of Court--Co-accused already granted bail by Sessions Judge--Question of guilt of accused requiring further inquiry--Bail granted.

Mumtaz Alam Gillani for Petitioner.

Syed Muhammad Saeed for the State.

This is an application for bail on behalf of Muhammad Ashraf petitioner, in a case under section 10/11 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979, registered at Police Station Minchinabad vide F.I.R. No. 355/81, dated 16-9-1981.

2. The prosecution case is that the petitioner and others abducted Mst. Manzooran in order to subject her to illicit intercourse and thereafter Muhammad Ashraf, the petitioner, Manzoor Ahmad and Fateh Muhammad co-accused committed Zina-bil-Jabr with her.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the name of the petitioner is not mentioned in the F.I.R.; that the co-accused namely, Manzoor Ahmad and Fateh Muhammad against whom there are allegations of Zina, have already been allowed bail by the Additional Sessions Judge-I, Bahawalnagar And as for the allegations of absconsion that is factually incorrect inasmuch as the petitioner remained attending the Court of E.A.C. Minchinabad in between the occurrence and his arrest.

As against this the learned counsel for the State has opposed this application on the ground that the earlier application moved by the petitioner has already been dismissed by this Court on 27-6-1983.

4. After hearing the learned counsel and going through the material available before me I find that while rejecting the earlier bail application of the petitioner, my learned brother observed:--

"The petitioner was arrested about 14 or 15 months after the statement of Mst. Manzooran and is alleged to have absconded. In the circumstances I do not extend the concession of bail to the petitioner and dismiss this petition."

It appears that true facts could not be brought to the notice of my learned brother on that date. Inasmuch as the certificate issued by the Extra Assistant Commissioner Minchinabad, which is on the record shows that the petitioner had been attending his Court regularly from 2-11-1981 to 11-4-1983. It is remarkable that the case also pertains to Police Station Minchinabad. I further find that the co-accused namely, Manzoor Ahmad and Fateh Muhammad have already been allowed bail by thei learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bahawalnagar.

In these circumstances I am of the opinion that question of guild of the petitioner now requires further inquiry. He is, therefore, allowed bail in the sum of Rs.10,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Additional Sessions Judge, Bahawalnagar.

M.Y.H. Bail granted.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.