Lawyers Directory Listing
Chat with us free on WhatsApp — tell us your city and legal matter and our team connects you with the right lawyer. No form, no fee.
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 919-B of 1983, decided on 24th July, 1983.
---S. 497/498--Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979) , Ss. 10 & 16--Bail--Offence of Zina--First information report silent about name of accused and allegation of rape not made against him--Bail granted.
Muhammad Bashir Khan for Petitioner.
Sardar Muhammad Rafique Khan for the State.
This petition for the grant of bail has been moved on behalf of Munir who stands arrested in case F.I.R. No.248, dated 2nd June, 1983 under section 10 read with section 16 of Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979, registered at Police Station Mumtazabad. As the Additional Sessions Judge dismissed the bail petition moved earlier by the petitioner, therefore, he has approached this Court for the grant of bail.
2. According to the prosecution case, Muhammad Hussain, his brother Ashraf and father Sardar by misrepresentation abducted Mst. Seeman wife of Murad Ali, complainant, from her house in the month of April, 1983. The matter was reported some two months later at the police station. During the investigation of the case Mst. Seeman abductee was recovered from the possession of the petitioner and his co-accused Muhammad Hussain and Ashraf while they were travelling in a tonga near B.C.G. Chowk, Multan. The abductee in her statement under section 161, Cr.P.C. stated that she was abudcted by Muhammad Hussain, Ashraf and Sardar and later Munir, petitioner, also joined them. She further stated that Ashraf had committed rape with her.
3. Learned counsel contends that no allegation of rape has been levelled against Munir, petitioner, and he has been involved in the case because of enmity inasmuch as his name does not figure in the F.I.R. As against this the learned counsel for the State opposes the grant of bail.
4. Having considered the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties I find that the petitioner has not been named in the F.I.R and. also there is no allegation of rape against him. In the circumstances of the case I am of the view that the petitioner has a good case for the grant of bail. Consequently, this petition is allowed. It is directed that the petitioner should be released on bail subject to his furnishing security in the sum of Rs. 5,000 (Rupees five thousand only) with one surety it the like amount to the satisfaction of Assistant Commissioner/Duty Magistrate, Multan.
M. Y. H. Bail granted
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer