Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: SHAKEEL AHMAD VS Respondent: THE STATE
1988 P Cr
1988 P Cr. L J 585
[Lahore]
Before Muhammad Munir Khan, J
SHAKEEL AHMAD‑‑Petitioner
versus
THE STATE‑‑Respondent
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 3181‑B of 1987, decided on 18th October, 1987.
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑
‑‑S. 497‑‑Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979) Ss. 10 & 11‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑Abductee making statement that she left house of her parents of her own free will and went to house of her mother's sister from where she left with accused and contracted Nikah with him; but before he could commit sexual intercourse she was brought back and delivered to her parents‑‑Accused no more required for investigation‑‑Bail granted in circumstances.
Muhammad Nafees Qureshi for Petitioner. Awais Naseem for the State.
ORDER
This is an application for grant of bail to Shakeel Ahmad petitioner in case under section 11/10 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Huddod) Ordinance, 1979 registered at P.S. Hajipura vide F.I.R. No.418 dated 1‑7‑1987.
The prosecution case is that the petitioner and others abducted Mst. Fehmeeda Begum in order to subject her to illicit intercourse and thereafter one Subedar committed Zina with her.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there are no allegations of zina against the petitioner. The learned counsel for the State has opposed this application.
4. I have considered the submission made by the learned counsel for the parties with care. I find that according to the statement of Fehmeeda Begum, the alleged abductee, she had left the house of', her parents with her consent; that after leaving the house of her' parents, she went to the house of the sister of her mother from where Shakeel Ahmad petitioner took her to the Province of Sind and contracted nikah with her and that before Shakeel Ahmad could commit sexual intercourse, she was brought back and delivered to her parents; and that the petitioner is no more required for investigation.
For what has been said above, I feel that a case for grant of bail to the petitioner has been made out. He is, therefore, allowed bail in the sum of Rs.20,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of A . C . /Duty Magistrate, Sialkot.
M. Y. H./S‑172/L Bail granted.