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

Section: 10(3)

(i)  Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979-- —-Ss. 10(3.) and 11 Conviction and sentence-Challenge to-Effect of-- Appeal was filed through Superintendent due to pauper-Accused was inter-alia — Complainant's version that his daughter was enticed away by accused for the purpose of shopping-After some days accused was apprehended and complainant was informed-Accused had abducted the victim to have illicit inter-course with her, Validity-Held : No impediment in recording ccfnviction under S. 16 instead of u/S. 11-As no prejudice will be caused to accused-Accused convicted u/S. 16 and sentenced to suffer five years. [P. 215] A (ii) Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979-- —S. 10(2)(3)-Difference of~Held : According to medical report there is no mark of violence found on her body-Victim remained with accused- Possibility of consenting party could not be ruled out-Beneift of doubt even in interpreting of charging section has to be extended to accused appellant is sentenced u/S. 10(2) for 5 years R.I. and Rs. 5,000/- fine in default further suffer 3 month R.I.                                            [P. 215] B Date of hearing : 12.6.2003.   judgment Zafar Pasha Chaudhry, J.--Hameed Masih son of Rehmat Masih was sent up to face trial in the 'Court of Mr. Arshad Iqbal, Additional Sessions Judge, Multan in case FIR No. 301 dated 27.6.2000 registered with Police Station Gulgasht, Multan under Sections 11 & 10(3) of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979. On conclusion of the trial he was convicted under Section 11 of the Ordinance ibid and was sentenced to -undergo imprisonment for life with a fine of Rs. 50,000/- is default whereof to suffer four months S.I. He was also convicted under Section 10(3) of the Ordinance ibid and was sentenced to undergo imprisonment for 14 years R.I. Benefit of Section 382-B. Criminal Procedure Code was extended to him. Both the…