Law: Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979

Section: VII,10,11

Law: Criminal Procedure Code, 1898

Section: 87

(a)    Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979)-------Ss. 10 & 11---Zina or zina-bil-jabr, kidnapping, abducting or inducing woman to compel for marriage, etc.---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt---Evidence of Waj-takkar---Accused was charged for kidnapping the daughter of the complainant for committing zina with her---Complainant nominated the appellant on the basis of information extended to him by two witnesses---One of the witnesses had been given up by the prosecution as unnecessary---Both the said witnesses were brothers inter-se and were maternal uncle of abductee---Said abandoned witness committed murder of the abductee and her father got the case registered against him under S.302, P.P.C---Later on the parties reached a compromise inter-se---Other witness had not adduced any reason for his presence at the spot where he claimed seeing appellant along with his co-accused persons, taking along abductee in a coach forcibly---In this case no reason whatsoever had been advanced by the witness, and no specific or approximate time of his presence at the spot had been advanced in evidence---Said witness stated that he did not know the accused prior to registration of the case and admitted that his brother was alleged for the murder of abductee---Said witness also admitted that he had come to the Court with complainant, meaning thereby that they did not develop strained relationship inter-se over the murder of abductee---Appeal against conviction was allowed, in circumstances.(b)    Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979)-------Ss. 10 & 11---Zina or zina-bil-jabr, kidnapping, abducting or inducing woman to compel for marriage, etc.---Appreciation of evidence---Benefit of doubt--Unnatural conduct of witness of Waj-takkar---Accused was charged for kidnapping the daughter of the complainant for committing zina with her---Record showed that the conduct of witness of Waj-takkar was not acceptable---When he claimed that the culprits were not known to him then the source of revelation of their names to him while extending information to complainant remained a…