Find a Lawyer

Every Lawyer listed in this directory is verified by SJP verification Team

✓ Free WhatsApp lawyer help
Need to speak to a lawyer now?

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.

💬 Instant WhatsApp chat ⚖ Verified lawyer directory ⏰ Replies in minutes

ABDUL SHAKOOR versus THE STATE


Criminal Code of Criminal Procedure (CRPC) Section 497 (Enforcement Hood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), abductor of Section 11 bail, stated that the accused affected him but did not commit delay in adultery In which the first information report was filed and the victim's statement under it. Section 6464, CRPC, recorded with his father twenty-six days after his recovery that the accused had a further inquiry.

1986 P Cr. L J 775

[Lahore]

Before Qurban Sadiq Ikram, J

ABDUL SHAKOOR‑‑Petitioner

Versus

THE STATE‑‑Respondent

Criminal Miscellaneous No. 1140/B of 1985, decided on 23rd November, 1985.

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

‑‑‑S. 497‑‑Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), S. 11‑‑Bail‑‑Abductee stating that accused enticed her but did not commit Zina‑‑Delay occurring in lodging first information report and statement of victim under S.164, Cr.P.C. recorded after twenty‑six days of her restoration to her father‑‑Case of accused to be that of further inquiry‑‑Bail granted.

M.R. Khalid for Petitioner.

Kanwar Muhammad Younas for the State.

Date of hearing: 23rd November, 1985.

JUDGMENT

The present case was registered on 21‑5‑1985 regarding an occurrence which took place on 12‑5‑1985 at the instance of Allah Ditta father of Ghulam Fatima abductee. It is alleged in the F.I.R. that Mst. Jatti mother of Abdul Shakoor and his sister Mst. Bakhan came to his house and took away his daughter Mst. Ghulam Fatima aged 14 years on the pretext of collecting wheat from the field. Shakoor accused was present by the road side. He enticed Mst. Fatima in order to commit rape on her. Mst. Fatima was restored to her father on 2‑8‑1985. He produced her before police on 28‑8‑1985 who got her statement recorded under section 164, Cr.P.C. She absolved all accused except Abdul Shakoor petitioner by saying that he enticed her. She did not allege rape by him. Ir. view of the fact that there is a delay in lodging of the F.I.R. and that she was produced before the police and also for her statement under section 164, Cr.P.C. after about 26 days of her restoration to her father, I find the case of petitioner to be that of further enquiry. He is admitted to bail on his furnishing of bail bond in the sum of Rs.5,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of A.C./Duty Magistrate Mian Channu, District Khanewal.

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.

🔍 Find a Lawyer
Popular cities: Lahore· Karachi· Islamabad· Rawalpindi· Multan· Faisalabad
top advocate from Mandra lawyer

SJP Lawyers DirectorySJP Lawyers Directory

Pakistan's leading legal-technology platform and verified lawyer directory — connecting clients, lawyers, law firms and Bar Associations across the country.

Get in Touch

© 2018–2027 SJP Legnocrats (SMC-Private) Limited. All rights reserved.
Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes
👋 Need a lawyer? Chat with us free on WhatsApp now.