Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: FALAK SHER And Others VS Respondent: THE STATE
Court Name: Lahore High Court Judge(s): Tanvir Ahmed Khan Title: FALAK SHER And Others vs THE STATE Case No.: Criminal Miscellaneous No. 2100-B of 1989 Date of Judgment:1989-07-10 Reported As: 1989 MLD 4634 Result: Bail allowed
Judgment ORDER The petitioners Falak Sher, Muhammad Yousaf and Muhammad Younas have applied for post- arrest bail in a case registered against them vide F.I.R. No. 126 at Police Station Kotwali Jhang on 15- 3-1989. 2. According to F.I.R., the complainant Muhammad Ashraf was looking after a bungalow of Ghulam Muhammad which was lying vacant for sale. It is his case that at about 10.00 p.m. Two of his friends, namely Amir Hussain and Haq Nawaz carne to see him. He took his guests to Ayyub Chowk, Jhang Sadar to take meal and tea etc. When they came back at about 11.00 p.m. They found that an electric bulb was on in a room of the bungalow and saw the present petitioners alongwith three unknown ladies committing Zina. Thereupon the complainant went to report the matter at Police Station. He met S.I. Rab Nawaz and other police officials at a nearby chowk where his statement was recorded. Thereafter the police party raided the spot and apprehended the petitioners alongwith three ladies while they were committing Zina. 3. Learned counsel has contended that the petitioners arc tenants in the, slops belonging to complainant's uncle and they have been implicated in a mala' fide manner out of ulterior motive. He has argued that mere reading of the FIR does not inspire any confidence whatsoever. He pointed out that during the course of investigation section 10 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979 has been deleted and instead challan has already been submitted under section 18 of the Offence, of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979 on 15-3-1989. He has further contended that the bail application of the petitioners was earlier dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge vide order dated 12-4-1989 on the ground that the case was still under investigation. Now the position is different. The challan has been submitted after investigation. He
---
## Page 2
has also submitted that all the three ladies have already been granted bail by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jhang. 4. Keeping all the facts and circumstances of the case into consideration, I think the petitioners are entitled to the concession of bail. Hence I admit them to bail in the sum of Rs. 30,000 each with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of A.C./Duty Magistrate. Jhang. S.A./F-159/L