MAZHAR HUSSAIN Versus State
This matter concerns a petition for bail filed by the petitioner, Mazhar Hussain, who was accused in F.I.R. No. 179 of 2002 at Police Station Lundianwala, District Faisalabad, for an alleged offence under the Hudood Ordinance involving an illicit liaison with the complainant's wife, Mst. Nasreen. The petitioner contended that Mst. Nasreen had obtained a court decree dissolving her previous marriage to the complainant, Faqir Hussain, and had subsequently married the petitioner of her own free will, resulting in a child. While the State argued that the dissolution decree was ex parte and therefore questionable, the Court observed that the decree remained valid and had not been annulled by any appellate court. Consequently, the Court held that the petitioner's guilt required further inquiry, satisfying the criteria for bail. The petition was converted into an appeal and allowed, with the petitioner granted bail subject to furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 25,000 with one surety to the satisfaction of the trial court.
- Does a marriage dissolved by a court decree, which has not been annulled by an appellate court, preclude the commission of an offence under the Hudood Ordinance?
- Is a petitioner entitled to bail when the validity of a divorce decree remains a matter requiring further inquiry?
- Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance 1979
ORDER
Petitioner and two others were proceeded against vide F.I.R. No.179 of 2002, Police Station Lundianwala, District Faisalabad, registered on the statement of Faqir Hussain who alleged that his wife Mst. Nasreen eloped with the petitioner in sequel to an illicit liaison.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Mst. Nasreen having got dissolved her marriage through a Court decree married petitioner of her own free-will and there is a child from the wedlock. In the afore-referred circumstances he contended, no offence under the Hudood Ordinance is made out. The learned Assistant Advocate-General does not agree, that the marriage between Nasreen and complainant Faqir Hussain stands dissolved by a Court judgment but he added that the said judgment was an ex parte judgment and therefore, it is not free from doubt.
3. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the State, we are of the view that, admittedly; the marriage between the complainant and Mst. Nasreen stands dissolved by a Court decree which has not been annulled by a Court of appeal. It is not denied that subsequent to the afore-referred dissolution, petitioner married Nasreen and there is a child from the wedlock. In the afore-referred circumstances, the question of petitioner's guilt requires further inquiry.
4. Resultantly this petition is converted into appeal and allowed. The petitioner is allowed bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.25,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court.
N.H.Q./M-42/SC ??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Bail allowed.