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.3108/B .of 1983, decided on 9th January, 1984.
‑‑‑S.497‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.314‑‑Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), S.10‑‑Extra‑judicial confession‑‑No evidence available against accused of illicit relations with deceased or subjecting her to Zina‑‑Prosecution based on extra‑judicial confession‑ Co‑accused with similar allegation bailed out‑‑Extra‑judicial confession, weakest type of evidence on basis of which accused could not be deprived of treatment meted out to others‑‑Case being covered by subsection (2) of S. 497, Cr.P.C. bail was granted to accused in circumstances.
Ghulam Muhammad and 2 others v. The State 1977 P Cr. L J 455 rel.
Ch. Mushtaq Ahmad Khan for Petitioner.
Badar‑ul‑Hassan Sabri for the State.
Abdul Ghani petitioner who is involved in a case under section 314 of the Pakistan Penal Code and section 10 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979 arising out of F.I.R. No. 58, dated 22‑3‑1983 of Police Station Sangla Hill district Sheikhupura has sought to be released on bail.
2. The allegations against the petitioner are that he and his co‑accused Javid had illicit relations with Mst. Hafeezan aged 14/15 years, daughter of Muhammad Siddiq, a co‑accused, and as a result of such relations a conception took place. The petitioner and the other co‑accused took away Mst. Hafeezan to a place near Sukheki for getting the pregnancy aborted. They failed in their efforts but Mst. Hafeezan died of such efforts and was buried in graveyard of village Chhore Sikhan. The matter was reported to the police by Muhammad Ramzan paternal‑uncle of Mst. Hafeezan. Her dead body was exhumed and autopsy was carried out in the aforesaid graveyard. As per chemical examiner's report in regard to the visceras and vaginal swabs sent to him, the deceased appears to have died while efforts were being made to secure abortion.
3. According to the F. I. R., there is no evidence about the petitioner and Javid having illicit relations with Mst. Hafeezan and of having subjected her to Zina. It is, however, alleged that the petitioner made an extra‑judicial confession about his illicit relations with Mst. Hafeezan before Liaqat Ali Lumberdar and requested him to use his influence to hush up the matter. The other co‑accused Javid as also Mst. Rasheedan, Muhammad Siddiq and Muhammad Sharif have already been released tin bail by the learned Additional Sessions Judge. The petitioner's plea for bail appears to have been declined on account of alleged extra‑judicial confession of the petitioner before Liaqat Ali. Extra‑judicial confession has always been considered as the weakest type of evidence by this Court as well as by the Supreme Court. In Ghulam Muhammad and 2 others v. The State 1977 P Cr. L J 455, the case against the petitioners was based on extra‑judicial confession but they were admitted to bail and it was held that it was a case covered by subsection (2) of section 497, Cr.P.C.
4. On account of extra‑judicial confession alone the petitioner cannot be deprived of the treatment which has been meted out to all of his co‑accused particularly to Javid against whom the allegations were of similar nature.
5. In the above circumstances and without prejudice to the merits of the case, the petitioner is admitted to bail in the sum of Rs 30,000 (Thirty thousand) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of A.C. Sheikhupura.
S. A.
Bail allowed.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer