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. 3354/B of 1986, decided on 22nd December, 1986.
‑‑‑S. 497‑‑Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), Ss.10(2), 13, 14 & 18‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑F.I.R. showing that complainant's wife deserted him about four months prior to registration of case and started living with her father, who was allegedly running a brothel in his house‑‑Complainant having strained relations with petitioners on account of wife's desertion and her father's refusal for her restoration to him‑‑Co‑accused already enlarged on bail by Court‑ Petitioners allowed bail, in circumstances.
Muhammad Arshad for Petitioners.
Imtiaz Ahmad for the State.
Date of hearing: 22nd December, 1986.
Ali Ahmad, Mat. Shamshad Bibi and Mst. Safia Mumtaz petitioners have moved this petition for bail in a case registered against them under Articles 10(2), 18, 13 and 14 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979.
2. The F.I. R. version is that Mst. Shamshad Bibi, wife of Abdul Sattar complainant, deserted his house about four months prior to the registration of the case and started living in the house of her father, Ali Ahmad petitioner. The complainant asked Ali Ahmad for her restoration but he declined to do so as he was running a brothel in his house. On 6‑8‑1986 the complainant learnt that Zina was being committed in the house of Ali Ahmad, upon which he alongwith Bashir Ahmad, Muhammad Amin, Farid Ali and Zafar went to his house and found Mst. Safia Mumtaz petitioner and co‑accused Muhammad Sharif in one room and Muhammad Abbas and Mst. Shamshad Bibi in the other. Shalwars of both the women were not on their persons. Their alleged partners were lying on them in order to commit Zina. The complainant and his companions apprehended the petitioners and their co‑accused and produced before the police.
3. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. Perusal of the F. I. R. clearly indicates that the complainant was having strained relations with the petitioners as Mst. Shamshad Bibi petitioner had deserted his house and Ali Ahmad petitioner had not acceded to his request for her restoration. Mst. Safia Mumtaz and Mst. Shamshad Bibi are women. Ali Ahmad petitioner is the husband of Safia Mumtaz and father of Mst. Shamshad Bibi. On inquiry, the learned State counsel submits that co‑accused Muhammad Sharif has been admitted to bail by the Additional Sessions Judge. In the circumstances, I feel inclined to the view that a case for the enlargement of the petitioners is made out. I, therefore' admit them to bail in the sum of Rs.25,000 with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of Assistant Commissioner, Pakpattan Sharif.
S.G.D./A‑23/L Bail allowed.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer