Lawyers Directory Listing
Unlock direct contact details for up to 10 lawyers so you can call or WhatsApp the right legal professional and move your matter forward with confidence.
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 3061‑B of 1986, decided on 15th December, 1986.
‑‑‑Ss. 497(5) & 498‑‑Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), S. 18‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 452‑‑Bail, cancellation of‑‑Petitioner entering into complainant's house, finding his daughter alone, dragging her into a room, gagging her mouth with her Dopatta and trying to commit Zina with her but fled away on timely arrival of prosecution witnesses‑‑Petitioner, held, was not entitled to extraordinary concession of pre‑arrest bail, in circumstances‑‑Bail already allowed was cancelled.
Taki Ahmad Khan for Petitioner.
Raja Zulqarnain for Respondents.
Mian Muhammad Bashir for the State.
Date of hearing: 15th December, 1986.
Mst. Nasreen Akhtar petitioner has moved this petition for cancellation of bail allowed to Muhammad Azim respondent by the Additional Sessions Judge, Sialkot, in case registered against him under Article 18 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979.
2. The prosecution version is that on 29‑9‑1986 at 3 p.m. the respondent trespassed into the house of Ahmad Ali and forcibly dragged his daughter Mat. Nasreen, the prosecutrix, into a room when she was alone in the house. She raised alarm, but the respondent took out a Khangar, gagged her mouth with Dopatta and tried to commit Zina with her. In the meantime, her father Ahmad Ali and Sardar Ali came there and on seeing them the respondent fled away from the spot.
3. The respondent moved an application for pre‑arrest bail in the Sessions Court which came up for hearing before the Additional Sessions Judge who admitted him to pre‑arrest bail on the ground that prima facie the offence falls under section 354, P.P.C. which is bailable.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. The learned trial Judge failed to take notice of the fact that the allegation also disclosed the commission of offence under 452 P.P.C. which is a non‑bailable offence. The petitioner was not entitled to the extraordinary concession of pre‑arrest bail. The bail allowed to him by the learned Additional Sessions Judge is, therefore, cancelled.
S. G. D./N‑6/L Bail cancelled.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer