Pakistan Case Lawโ† Search
1991 P Cr. L J 2405

GHULAM MUHAMMAD Alias GHAMMOON vs THE STATE--.

Citation1991 P Cr. L J 2405
CourtLahore High Court
Case No.Criminal Miscellaneous No.1502-B of 1991
Date1991-05-14
Judge(s)Sardar Muhammad Sarfraz Dogar
ResultOrder accordingly

ORDER

Petitioner seeks bail in case F.I.R. No. 139 under section 10/16 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979, registered at Police Station Wan Bachran, on 19-8-1989.

2. According to the F.I.R. Petitioner had abducted Mst. Wasoon alongwith others. Some of his co- accused were arrested. Challan was submitted against them and they were acquitted. Petitioner allegedly had absconded. He was arrested on 23-9-1990. Mst. Wasoon abductee in this case was also arrested on the same day. Both of them stand challaned.

3. Earlier petition, moved on behalf of the petitioner before this Court was disposed of as withdrawn.

The instant petition has been moved on his behalf on the ground that he is in jail for the last eight months and that his co-accused Mst. Wasoon was released on bail vide order passed on 3-4-1991.

It is contended that there is no ocular account of the offence of Zina. Although according to the counsel for the State and the complainant witnesses of abduction are available yet the argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner possesses weight that in spite of their statements petitioner's co-accused have been acquitted. Keeping all the facts in view, a case for bail appears to have made out. The petition is allowed. The petitioner shall be released on bail on his furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs. Twenty thousand with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of A.C. Mianwali.

4. It may be noted that the learned counsel for the complainant had pointed out that Ramzan, a co-accused of the petitioner, was allowed bail by my learned brother Khalil-ur-Rehman's Ramdey, J. For that, this petition should have been sent to the Court of my learned brother Khalil-ur-Rahman Ramdey, J., but I do not consider that necessary as the said accused was tried and stands acquitted. The petitioner is to be tried separately. The evidence against him is also of a different nature, too.

For educational and research use only โ€” not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.
DisclaimerยทPrivacyยทTermsยทSearch