Marriage with sister in Law

Citation Name: PLJ 2009 FSC 84
Appelant Side: MUHAMMAD RIAZ and another
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: STATE
Judge Name: Syed Afzal Haider
Judgment Result:Appeal accepted.
Other Law Journal References: Coming Soon
----ss. 10(2) & 11--jointly appeal was filed--conviction and sentence recorded against accused by trial court--challenge to--appreciation of evidence--accused abducted/enticed away complaint's sister with object of committing zina-bil-jabr--male accused divorced older sister of co-accused--section 11 of ordinance, 1979 was altered to s. 10 of offence of zina (enforcement of hudood ordinance--question of--whether nikah between both accused was solemnized during iddat period--held: husband after divorcing his wife was not competent to enter into another nikah so long as the first wife was in iddat might be overlooked because even senior govt. officer might not be awared of provisions of personal law but an additional sessions judge, is supposed to be well versed, as a student of law, with fundamental principles of muslim personal law pertaining particular to family life--wherein the marriage with the other sister during subsistence of marriage with her sister was declared void--element of abduction has not been proved because according to complainant is a waj-takkar witness--conviction and sentence recorded by trial court u/s. 10(2) of offence of zina as serious doubt has crept in prosecution version--appeal was accepted.

To view full case click on Full Case Description
Displaying Results for marriage with sister in law
Citation Name: PLJ 2006 Lahore High Court 183
Appelant Side: Mst. IRFANA FAIZ and another
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: STATE and 2 others
Judge Name: Muhammad Jehangir Arshad
Judgment Result:Petition dismissed.
Other Law Journal References: Coming Soon
----before expiry of iddat--validity of talaq--talaq is not effective and in present case distinguish feature was that petitioner's marriage who stood within prohibited degree before expiry of iddat period--held: no inclined to legalize that marriage on touchstone of law declared by supreme court by ignoring distinguishable feature--constitutional petition being equitable discretionary relief same could not be extended exercised when grant of such relief is immoral unfair or against dictates of good conscience and fair play--marriage between parties just three days after alleged divorce with real sister of earlier wife was an unholy which could not be perpetuated by high court through constitutional petition.

To view full case click on Full Case Description
Displaying Results for marriage with sister in law
Citation Name: PLJ 2005 Cr.C 929
Appelant Side: AKBAR ALI
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: NAZIM HUSSAIN and 2 others
Judge Name: Ijaz Ahmad Chaudhry
Judgment Result:??
Other Law Journal References: Coming Soon
----s. 497(5)--offence of zina (enforcement of hudood) ordinance, (vii of 1979), s. 11--cancellation of bail before arrest--prima facie--prevalent law for reconciliation between spouses--conduct of--validity of nikah--both accused/respondents were guilty of void marriage because person could not contract nikah with two real sisters at same time--matter was required thorough probe and investigation, but grant of pre-arrest bail to respondent/accused has hampered investigation--at that stage remaining of respondent/accused with each other would amount to continuation of commission of zina-bil-raza with each--held: conduct of respondents disentitled them to grant of bail before arrest as both prima facie were guilty of an immoral act by deceiving earlier wife, the real sister and other relatives--grant of pre-arrest bail to accused set aside and bail cancelled.

To view full case click on Full Case Description
Displaying Results for marriage with sister in law
Citation Name: PLJ 2004 Cr.C 321
Appelant Side: MUHAMMAD NAWAZ
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: STATE
Judge Name: SH. ABDUL RASHID
Judgment Result:Bail allowed.
Other Law Journal References: Coming Soon
--ss. 10/11-criminal procedure code, 1898 (v of 1898), s. 497-post arrest bail application-offence attributed to petitioner was abduction of complainant daughter and commission of zina with her-petitioner claimed to have divorced his first wife/elder sister of alleged abductee and had placed on record 'nikahnama' with her younger sister-even if prosecution case was admitted that first wife had not been divorced in accordance with law and first "nikah" was still subsisting, subsequent nikah with younger sister of first wife would only amount to irregular marriage and issues of such marriage would be legitimate-petitioner was thus, not committing zina with his second wife-second marriage of petitioner would become valid on divorcing first wife, whom he claims to have divorced-petitioner had thus, committed no offence-petitioner was, therefore, admitted to bail in sum of specified amount with one surety of like amount to satisfaction of trial court.

To view full case click on Full Case Description
Displaying Results for marriage with sister in law
Citation Name: PLJ 2002 Cr.C 651
Appelant Side: JAMIL ARSHAD
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: STATE
Judge Name: MIAN MUHAMMAD JAHANGIR AND M.A. SHAHID SIDDIQUI
Judgment Result:Appeal partly accepted.
Other Law Journal References: Coming Soon
-s. 302-b~murder~conviction and sentence-appeal against-although, accused has not taken up this plea in his statement under section 342 cr.p.c. but prosecution case itself suggests that mst. n (deceased) had contracted marriage with k (deceased) secretly more than a year prior to occurrence and then she left house of her parents about eight months thereafter-such unceremonious marriages in our social set up are not approved and often not accepted even by parents of spouses who fell humiliated and exposed to contempt and criticism-accused being nearst in degree to mst. n must have remained under constant mental torture, pinching him and compelling him to take revenge-he must have felt difficult to face his friends, relatives and other people of his locality-a sensible man in ordinary circumstances would not kill his own sister and brother-in-law-mother of accused has lost her daughter on one hand and in case sentence is not altered she would be losing her son also-k (deceased) also cannot be regarded as "muasoom-uddum" (as he was alsoresponsible for violating out well established social norms and bring bad name not only to his own family but also to family of accused-deathsentence altered to imprisonment for life.

To view full case click on Full Case Description
Displaying Results for marriage with sister in law
Citation Name: PLJ 2000 Lahore High Court 1466
Appelant Side: Mst. HASEENA and another
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, DERA GHAZI KHAN and 2 others
Judge Name: NASIM SIKANDAR
Judgment Result:Petition accepted.
Other Law Journal References: Coming Soon
--ss. 10 & 19-criminal procedure code, 1898 (v of 1898), s. 154--constitution of pakistan (1973), arts. 11 & 199--quashing of f.i.r. registered against petitioners who were allegedly husband and wife-basis of f.i.r. appears to be entiy in column of nikahnama between brother of petitioner and sister of complainant wherein if in lieu of dower or any part thereof, any property had been given its nature and significance is to be recorded; however, in that column instead of amount of dower or detail of property it was entered that in lieu of wife of brother of petitioner, petitioner would be married to son of complainant-petitioner at that time was three years of age-such entry itself was against art. 11 of the constitution, which forbids, slavery in any form-to indicate name of individual human being in column provided for money or money's worth or property was violative of basic status of individual as human being-registration of f.i.r. was all the more unfortunate that petitioner after marriage had two children when the same was registered against her-marriage of three years old girl which was allegedly performed needs to be condemned both in fact as in law-no legal evidence, however, was available to show that petitioner was wife of complainant's son when she married co-petitioner-registration of f.i.r. and putting petitioners to trial was mala fide and illegal per se-f.i.r was quashed-complainant and police officer who had investigated and prepared challan would pay specified amount each to both petitioners as penalty and costs for having illegally set in motion criminal proceedings-superintendent of police was directed not to entrust to concerned police officer with investigation of any matter involving family laws for at least next one year till he was properly instructed in that branch of law.