HAZRAT GUL vs AJMAL KHAN And 2 Other
This petition for leave to appeal sought the cancellation of bail granted to two respondents by the Lahore High Court in a case involving charges under the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979. The respondents, accused of offenses under sections 10, 11, and 16 of the Ordinance, had initially been refused bail by the Additional Sessions Judge, Attock. Subsequently, the High Court granted them bail, reasoning that the respondents had entered into a marriage without external compulsion and that the validity of the alleged Nikah required further evidentiary inquiry, thus bringing their case within the scope of further inquiry. The Supreme Court examined the impugned order to determine if the High Court had exercised its discretion legally. Finding no illegality in the High Court's reasoning regarding the necessity of further inquiry into the marriage's validity, the Supreme Court declined to interfere with the grant of bail. The petition was dismissed on the grounds that it lacked merit, affirming the principle that bail may be granted where the prosecution's case requires further investigation.
- Does a claim of valid marriage in a Zina case constitute grounds for further inquiry regarding bail?
- Can the Supreme Court interfere with a High Court order granting bail if no illegality is present?
- Section 10, Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance 1979
- Section 11, Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance 1979
- Section 16, Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance 1979
ORDER
Petitioner seeks cancellation of bail of the two respondents granted by a learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench, vide the impugned order, dated 15th April, 1986.
2. It. Is a case under sections 10,11 and 16 of the. Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood)
Ordinance, 1979 (Ordinance VII of 1979) registered in the Police Station, Makhad, District Attock, vide F.I.R. No. 9, dated 26-2-1986. Respondents Nos. 1 and 2 namely Ajmal Khan and Mst. Nazir Jan applied for bail to the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Attock but were refused bail per order, dated 29-3-1986. Then, they filed an application for grant of bail before the High Court and bail was allowed to them, vide the impugned order, dated the 15th April, 1986 on the grounds that the two respondents were married without any compulsion from any outside quarter, and unless, on evidence, the Nikah alleged is found to be otherwise the respondents' case is clearly that of further inquiry.
As this order does not suffer from any illegality, we decline to interfere with impugned order. The petition, is without any merit, and the same is consequently, dismissed.