| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2017 SLG 1511 2017 SLD 1511 2017 PLD 173 |
Peshawar High Court
Criminal Appeal No. 215-M of 2015, decision Dated: 7-02-2017. Heard on: 6-02-2017.
IKRAMULLAH KHAN, JUSTICE, MOHAMMAD IBRAHIM KHAN, JUSTICE
Sajjad Anwar for Appellants. Sabir Shah, A.A.G. for the State and Allah Dad Khan for
Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 215-M of 2015, decision Dated: 7-02-2017. Heard on: 6-02-2017.
IKRAMULLAH KHAN, JUSTICE, MOHAMMAD IBRAHIM KHAN, JUSTICE
Sajjad Anwar for Appellants. Sabir Shah, A.A.G. for the State and Allah Dad Khan for
Respondent
MST. ULFAT BIBI AND ANOTHER --AppellantS
VS
THE STATE THROUGH ADDITIONAL ADVOCATEGENERAL AND ANOTHER --RespondentS
Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)
Section: 365-B,493-A,494
(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860) ---.--- ---.--- -Ss. 365-B, 493-A & 494 ---.--- Kidnapping, abducting or inducing woman to compel for marriage, cohabitation caused by a man deceitfully inducing or belief of lawful marriage, marrying again during lifetime of hushand or wife ---.--- Appreciation of evidence ---.--- Benefit of doubt ---.--- Prosecution case was that the accused abducted the wife of the complainant for the purpose of unlawful marriage ---.--- Co-accused lady knowingly that she was under the lawful wedlock of the complainant contracted unlawful marriage with the accused and accused after abducting the co-accused cohabited with her through deceitful means of lawful marriage ---.--- Accused was charged under S.365-B, P.P.C. pre-requisite of which was kidnapping or abducting a woman with intent to compel her to marry any person against her will and forcing or seducing her to illicit intercourse ---.--- in the present case, illicit intercourse in between the accused persons by force was lacking ---.--- Statement of co-accused recorded under S.161, Cr.P.C. did not show her abducting or subjected to illicit intercourse ---.--- Prosecution witnesses were silent about kidnapping or abducing of co-accused ---.--- In order to prove the charge under S.494, P.P.C. prosecution should have brought any evidence to the effect that from the date of alleged abducting of co-accused till the accused person were arrested, they had contracted unlawful marriage ---.--- Neither any witness had been examined to that effect nor any documentary evidence in the shape of Nikah-Nama were produced ---.--- Accused was alleged to have abducted co-accused and co-habitated with her through deceitful means of lawful marriage ---.--- Medical officer, who medically examined co-accused lady, formed opining that she had conducted intercourse and she was pregnant for a period of eight weeks and six days but there was no sign of fresh intercourse as she could not give the exact date of intercourse ---.--- Attending circumstances suggested that co-accused lady had become pregnant in consummation with her husband a month earlier ---.--- Said pregnancy had not taken place during the time of…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492