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. 1729/E of 1983, decided on 20th July, 1983.
‑‑S. 497‑‑Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), Ss. 10 a 11 ‑Offence of Zina‑‑Abductee 17 years old‑‑Nikahnama of abductee with accused showing consent of abductee to elope‑‑No mark of violence found on person of victim of rape and her medical examination showed I that she had already been used to cohabitation‑ Abductee incriminated accused persons in her statement recorded under S. 164, Cr.P.C. after having been in police custody for day or two‑‑Such statement, held, might be without her free consent‑‑Bail granted.
1982 P Cr. L J 196 and 1983 P Cr. L J 325 ref.
Akmal Saleemi for Petitioner.
Aziz Qureshi for the State.
Date of hearing 20th July, 1983.
This is an application for bail after arrest in a case registered at P.S. Renala Khurd on 23‑4‑1983, for offences under section 10/11 of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979.
2. It is contended that the girl being 17, was a consenting party to elope with petitioner Salim and ultimately married him on 23‑4‑198 at Vehari. A copy of Nikahnama has been produced. Reliance is placed on 1982 P Cr. L J 196 and 1983 P Cr. L J 325 to urge that where Nikahnama though fake, is set up, it becomes a question of further enquiry. The authorities appear to be applicable to the instant case of all fours, inasmuch as there was no mark of violence on the person of the lady and her medical examination showed that she had already been used to cohabitation. In reply, learned counsel for the State referred to the abductee's statement under section 164, Cr.P.C. as recorded on 5‑5‑1983 before a Magistrate, Renala Khurd after her recovery, wherein she incriminated the present two petitioners for having ravished her after enticing her away from her house through a lady Mst. Azizan.
3. This statement was made by the abductee after having remained in police custody for, a day or two. There was, therefore, some force to urge that it may note have been made as a free agent. The first mentioned authority semis to cover this aspect as well. Accordingly, both the petitioners are allowed bail in the sum of Rs.10,000 (Rupees ten thousand only) with one surety each in the like sum to the satisfaction of Assistant Commissioner, Okara.
M. A. K. Bail granted.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer