Case Details

Citation(s)
1979 SLG 138 1979 SLD 138 1979 PLD 154
Lahore High Court
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 612/H of 1978, decided on 1st August 1978.
MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J
Sh. Magbool Ahmad for Petitioner.

MUHAMMAD INAYAT

VS

Ch. MUHAMMAD SALEEM AND 2 others--Respondents

Law:

Section:

Criminal, Procedure Code (V of 1898) - S. 491-Habeas corpus-Abduction-Proceedings in High Court under S. 491-Cannot be treated as of final character, either qua age of abductee, or willingness or otherwise of abductee at time of original occurrence, or with regard to nikahnama, such being ultimately disputed as fake-Trial Court if ultimately finding father's version in F. I. R. regarding abductee's age to be correct, or girl's being forcibly abducted in first instance, all statements of girl, whether under S. 164, Cr. P. C. or in High Court in its writ jurisdiction, as also affidavits, complaints against her own parents and other inspired or otherwise proceedings have to be put in juxtaposition to abductee's plight, she being in hands of her abductors as a tool of further oppression and humiliation- Accused not to be allowed liberty of restoration of abductee to him so as to further humiliate her and ruin her future-Parties if very closely . related more humane approach to entire case, held, might be advisable provided alleged abductor asks for forgiveness from abductees' father, seeks her hand in an honourable manner, and succeeds in suchattempt-Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 363/366/34. . ORDER This is a petition under section 491, Cr. P. C., for the production of an abductee at the instance of the accused. 2. Learned counsel has produced for my perusal copy of the F. I. R under section 363/366 read with section 34, P. P: C. It was lodged by the father of the detenu, alleged abductee. He produced the copy of birth entry of the abductee and himself gave her age as 13 years. Learned counsel has on the other hand relied on an X-ray report to contend that she is major. I do not agree with him. To say in these proceedings that the father is not a competent witness in so far as the age of his own daughter is concerned would not be fair nor would it be possible to give finding in these proceedings, without subjecting the father to cross-examination, that when giving her age as 13 years he had told a lie. It is, therefore, not possible at this stage to prefer any other opinion evidence with regard to the age of the abductee as against the direct evidence of the father…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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