Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: RASHAD VS Respondent: THE STATE
Court Name: Supreme Court of Pakistan Judge(s): Abdul Hameed Dogar, Tanvir Ahmed Khan Title: RASHAD vs THE STATE Case No.: Criminal Petition No,215-L of 2002 Date of Judgment:2002-04-15 Reported As: 2002 SCMR 1329 Result: Leave refused
Judgment ORDER ' ABDUL HAMEED DOGAR, J.---The petitioner seeks leave to appeal against the order, dated 13-3- 2002 passed by the Lahore High Court, Lahore, whereby Criminal Miscellaneous No,1375-B of 2002 filed by the petitioner for bail was dismissed. 2. The brief facts of the case are that a F.I.R. Was lodged by the complainant Shamshad Akhtar wherein she stated that on the night between 10/11-12-2000 at 3-30 a.m. Sehri time, she had gone outside of her house in the fields to ease herself. Meanwhile, the petitioner Rashad appeared there with revolver and threatened her to remain silent who dragged her to his Baithak and committed Zinal-bil-Jabr with her. On release, she came out and raised hue and cry which attracted her father Muhammad Amin and P.W. Muhammad Aslam to whom she narrated the entire incident. They tried to catch hold of the petitioner but he succeeded in decamping whereupon a case under section 10, Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979) was got registered against Rashad petitioner on 18-12-2000 at Police Station Lundianwala, District Faisalabad. 3. Mr. Mahmood A. Qureshi, learned Advocate-on-Record for the petitioner mainly contended that not only the incident is unseen one, but also there is unexplained delay of 6/7 days in lodging of F.I.R., which facts make the case of the petitioner to be of further inquiry. 4. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the impugned order which does not suffer from any defect or illegality. The directions to conclude the trial expeditiously have already been issued by the Lahore High Court, as such we do not see any reason to interfere with the impugned order which is accordingly maintained. Moreover, a direct allegation of committing Zina has been levelled against the petitioner. The offence being heinous
---
## Page 2
in nature, the petitioner is not entitled to the concession of bail. Accordingly, the petition is dismissed and leave to appeal refused.