| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2004 SLG 1049 2004 SLD 1049 2004 SCMR 893 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Petition No.82 L of 2003, decision dated: 25-02-2003.(On appeal from the order dated 9 1 2003 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No.8504/B of 2002)
JAVED IQBAL AND FAQIR MUHAMMAD KHOKHAR, JJ
Malik Abdul Wahid, Advocate Supreme Court with Muhammad Ozair Chughtai, Advocate on-Record for Petitioner. Nemo for
Respondents
Criminal Petition No.82 L of 2003, decision dated: 25-02-2003.(On appeal from the order dated 9 1 2003 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No.8504/B of 2002)
JAVED IQBAL AND FAQIR MUHAMMAD KHOKHAR, JJ
Malik Abdul Wahid, Advocate Supreme Court with Muhammad Ozair Chughtai, Advocate on-Record for Petitioner. Nemo for
Respondents
MUHAMMAD ASHRAF
VS
MUNIR AHMAD and others
Law:
Section:
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--S. 497(5) Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), Ss.16/10 Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3) Cancellation of pre arrest bail Section 16 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979, had already been deleted from the charge as a result of investigation in the case and no sufficient incriminating material was available on record to, prima facie, make out a case against the accused under S.10 thereof F.I.R. was lodged after delay of seven months Wife of the complainant had left his house and filed a suit for dissolution of marriage against him, meaning thereby that she did not want to live with her husband Impugned order of High Court granting pre arrest bail to accused did not suffer from any illegality or infirmity Leave to appeal was refused to complainant accordingly. ORDER JAVED IQBAL, J. This petition for leave to appeal is directed against order dated 9 1 2003 passed by learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, in chambers whereby ad interim pre arrest bail granted in favour of respondents has been confirmed. 2. It is mainly contended by Malik Abdul Wahid, learned Advocate Supreme Court on behalf of petitioner that pre arrest bail should not have been granted in view of sufficient incriminating material available against respondents connecting them with the commission of offence. It is further contended that the discretion as conferred upon the learned Single Judge has not been exercised judiciously which resulted in serious miscarriage of justice. It is also pointed out that the respondent had abducted the wife of petitioner for the purpose of Zina which aspect of the matter has been taken very lightly by the learned High Court resulting in serious prejudice. 3. We have carefully examined the contentions as agitated on behalf of petitioner in the light of relevant provisions of law and record made available. The order impugned has been perused carefully, operative portion whereof is reproduced herein-below for ready reference: "7. I have carefully considered the arguments. From the record it appears that as a result of investigation the offence under…
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