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. 3162-B of 1983, decided on 31st December, 1983.
---S.497/498--Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), S.18--Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.452--Bail--Accused under age of 18 years--Allegation against accused of catching hold of complainant in order to subject her to rape but before he could do something more, witnesses reaching on her alarm and accused running away--Question of guilt of accused requiring further inquiry--Bail granted.
Shaukat Ali v. The State P L D 1982 F S C 79 ref.
Dr. Khalid Ranjha for Petitioner.
Mian Mushtaq Ahmad for the State.
Date of hearing: 1st February, 1983.
This is an application for bail on behalf of Muhammad Saqib petitioner in a case under section 452, P.P.C. and section 18 of the offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979, registered at P.S. Wahdat Colony, vide F.I.R. No.379 dated 7th December, 1983.
2. The prosecution case is that the petitioner after having trespassed into the house of the complainant, caught hold of her in order to commit rape upon her, but could not achieve the object.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that since the petitioner is not an adult, the maximum punishment which can be awarded to the petitioner does not exceed 2 years. Furthermore, the allegations accepted at its face value, no case punishable under section 18 of offence of Zina is made out against the petitioner. Reliance has been placed on case "Shaukat Ali v.The State" P L D 1982 F S C 79. Learned counsel for the State has, however, opposed this application.
4. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and going through the material available before me, I find that according to the entry in the birth register, copy marked 'A' the petitioner is under the age of 18 years; that the allegation against him is that he caught hold of the complainant in order to subject her to rape but before he could do something more, the witnesses reached the spot on the alarm raised by the complainant and on seeing them, the petitioner made good his escape. In these circumstances, I am of the opinion, the question of the guilt of the petitioner needs further enquiry. Resultantly, the petitioner is allowed bail in the sum of Rs. 10,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of A.C/Duty Magistrate, Lahore.
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