| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1981 SLG 3057 = 1981 SLD 3057 = 1981 PCRLJ 541 |
Lahore High Court
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 463-B of 1981, decided on 2nd March, 1981.
Presented By: M. S. H. Qureshi, J
Syed Waheed-ur-Rehman Gilani for Petitioner. Kh. Muhammad Asghar for the State.
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 463-B of 1981, decided on 2nd March, 1981.
Presented By: M. S. H. Qureshi, J
Syed Waheed-ur-Rehman Gilani for Petitioner. Kh. Muhammad Asghar for the State.
ABBAS Petitioner
VERSUS
THE STATE-Respondent
Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
Section: 498
Law: Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979
Section: 11
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) S. 498 read with Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979) S. 11-Bail-Statement of alleged abductee fully implicating petitioner on charge of abduction and committing zina-bil-jabr and medico-legal report showing woman having been subjected to sexual act a number of times-Petitioner being involved in an offence punishable with imprisonment for life, bail declined. Yaqoob Khan v. The State 1979 P Cr. L J 1069 ref. ORDER Petitioner, Abbas, is implicated in a case under section 11 of Ordinance VI1 of 1979. The F. I. R. in the case was lodged on 23rdNovember, 1980 by Sardar, alleging that his daughter Mst. Safia aged 14/15 years had been abducted by the petitioner. Later, the girl was rescued while travelling in a bus with the petitioner and she made her statement under section 164, Cr. P. C. in which she not only supported the allegation of abduction but also that zina-bil-jahr had been committed on her more than once by the petitioner. The medico-legal report also shows that she had been subjected to sexual act. In these circumstances, the petitioner's application for bail moved before the Court of Session was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Gujranwala, on 24thJanuary, 1981. 2. On merits I find little justification to allow the application. The statement of the girl under section 164, Cr. P. C. has been read over in Court and she has fully implicated the petitioner learned counsel urges that on the basis of the medico-legal report of 24th November, 1980 she was 17/18 years of age and not 14/15 as given in the F. I. R. It .appears that she was radiologically examined on 28th November, 1980 and her age was…