| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2009 SLG 3404 2009 SLD 3404 2009 PCRLJ 736 |
Lahore High Court
Criminal Miscellaneous No.12350/B of 2008, decided on 28th January, 2009.
Before Hasnat Ahmad Khan, J
Hafiz Abdul Rehman Ansari for Petitioner. Shahid Mehmood Khan D.P.-G. with Khadim S.-I. for the State. Zafar Iqbal Chohan for the Complainant.
Criminal Miscellaneous No.12350/B of 2008, decided on 28th January, 2009.
Before Hasnat Ahmad Khan, J
Hafiz Abdul Rehman Ansari for Petitioner. Shahid Mehmood Khan D.P.-G. with Khadim S.-I. for the State. Zafar Iqbal Chohan for the Complainant.
MUHAMMAD KHAWAR BASHIR----Petitioner
VS
THE STATE----Respondent
Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
Section: 498,497(2)
Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)
Section: 496-B
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----Ss. 498 & 497(2)---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.496-B---Pre-arrest bail, confirmation of---Further inquiry---Case was of two versions---Accused had claimed that alleged abductee had married him voluntarily vide registered Nikahnama, which was contracted before the lodging of the F.I.R.---Complainant had claimed that accused had abducted a married lady whose Nikah had already been solemnized with an other person---Said other person did not opt to lodge the F.I.R. regarding the abduction of his wife/alleged abductee---Nikahnama relied upon by accused was duly thumb-marked and signed by alleged abductee and at one stage she had claimed that she did not sign or thumb-mark the same---Alleged abductee had stated that she was forced by accused to sign certain documents---Alleged abductee appeared before Special Magistrate and got recorded her statement under S.164, Cr.P.C., but after joining her parents, she claimed that said statement was procured by accused under pressure---Such statement of alleged abductee had revealed that it was recorded by the Magistrate after due compliance of relevant provisions of law---Presumption of correctness was attached to the judicial proceedings---On at least two occasions, she owned her marriage before High Court as well as the Magistrate and she had filed a suit for jactitation of marriage before a Family Court---Court had to decide the question of genuineness or otherwise of Nikahnama relied upon by accused---Alleged abductee being in the custody of the complainant, physical custody of accused was not required by Investigator for effecting recovery of the alleged abductee---Allegation regarding the theft of the golden ornaments and net cash, also required further inquiry---Case of further inquiry having been made out in favour of accused within the purview of S.497(2), Cr.P.C., accused had become entitled to bail as a matter of right---Besides, in the peculiar circumstances of the case when the alleged abductee had been changing her stance from time to time, dismissal of certain pre-arrest bail applications filed by accused due to his non-appearance, would not disentitle him to get…
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