Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: MUHAMMAD BAKHSH VS Respondent: THE STATE
1988 P Cr
1988 P Cr. L J 1700
[Lahore]
Before Muhammad Munir Khan, J
MUHAMMAD BAKHSH and another‑‑Petitioners
versus
THE STATE‑‑Respondent
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 1280/13 of 1988, decided on 26th. April, 1988.
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑
‑‑S. 497‑‑Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), S.10‑‑Bail, grant of‑‑Allegedly petitioners committed Zina before they were apprehended on the spot whereas Chemical Examiner's report revealed that vaginal swabs were riot stained with semen‑‑Case for grant of bail having been made out, petitioners were allowed bail.
Rana Abdul Hameed for Petitioners.
Muhammad Naeem for the State.
Yahya Saleem for the Complainant.
ORDER
This is an application for grant of bail to Muhammad Bukhsh and Mst. Kalsoom petitioners in case under section 10 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979 registered at P.S. Saddar Jhang, vide F.I.R. No. 84/88, dated 1‑3‑1988.
2. The prosecution case is that Muhammad Bukhsh, Muhammad Ismail, Manzoor Hussain and Noor had seen the two petitioners committing Zina in the house of Muhammad Bukhsh complainant so the complainant and the P.Ws. arrested them on the spot.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the story of the prosecution that the four persons namely Muhammad Bukhsh and three others had seen from the holes of the doors, the petitioners committing Zina, does not ring true. Learned counsel for the State has opposed this application.
4. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties with care. I find that the prosecution case is that the petitioners had committed Zina before they were apprehended on the spot whereas the Chemical Examiner's report reveals that the vaginal swabs were not stained with semen.
5. For what has been stated above, without making expression of opinion, lest it may prejudice the merits of the case, I feel that a case for grant of bail to the petitioners has been made out, and they are, therefore, allowed bail in the sum of Rs.20,000 each with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of A.C./Duty Magistrate, Jhang.
S.G.D./M‑725/L Bail allowed.