Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Official Citation: 2025 SHC 2041
Court / Jurisdiction: Sindh High Court
Petitioner: Cr.Rev 71/2025 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur - Marvi Khatoon Patafi (Applicant)
Ruling Summary: This decision was rendered by the Sindh High Court, officially reported as 2025 SHC 2041. In this matter between Cr.Rev 71/2025 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur - Marvi Khatoon Patafi (Applicant) and the Respondent, the court adjudicated key questions of statutory construction, procedural regularity, and legal precedent under Pakistani law.
Core Holding: The honorable bench evaluated governing statutory provisions and judicial authorities to establish the rights of the parties, delivering the binding reasoning set out below.
COURT: Sindh High Court CASE NO: Cr.Rev 71/2025 (S.B.) Sindh High Court, Bench at Sukkur CITATION: 2025 SHC SUK 2041 PARTIES: Marvi Khatoon Patafi (Applicant) ORDER DATE: 11-JUL-25 BENCH: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Jawad Akbar Sarwana(Author) A.F.R: Yes ------------------------------------------------------------ O R D E R S H E E T
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH BENCH AT SUKKUR
Crl. Revision No.S- 71 of 2025
Hearing of case (Priority) 1. For orders on office objection at flag ‘A’ 2. For hearing of MA No.3356/2025 (S/A) 3. For hearing of main case
29.07.2025
Mr. Alam Sher Khan Bozdar, Advocate for the Applicant Syed Naveed Ahmed Shah, Deputy Attorney General Mr. Muhammad Raza Katohar, Deputy PG for State
O R D E R
Jawad Akbar Sarwana, J .- This Criminal Revision Application is filed by applicant, Mst. Marvi Khatoon Pitafi, on behalf of her husband, Abdul Majeed Pitafi, who has been declared as an absconder/proclaimed offender in Sessions Case No.413 of 2021, titled The State vs. Abdul Majeed and others, arising out of FIR No. 104 of 2018 registered under Sections 302, 148, and 149 PPC at Police Station Khanpur Mahar, District Ghotki. The said case is presently pending trial before the Court of the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Ghotki.
2. The applicant had moved an application before the trial court seeking recall of the non -bailable warrants of arrest issued against her husband , enabling him to return from the Kingdo m of Saudi Arabia to Pakistan and face trial in the aforementioned case. However, the trial Court dismissed the said application vide impugned order dated 20.06.2025, on the ground that the court lacked the requisite jurisdiction to grant the relief and the applicant should approach the High Court. Hence, this criminal revision.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the passport of the absconder/proclaimed offender, namely Abdul Majeed Pitafi, expired on 21.07.2024 , and his CNIC has been blocked since 03.12.2021. Thus , at present, he is unable to renew his passport and travel.
4. Learned DAG as well as the learned Deputy Prosecutor General for the State have vehemently opposed this Criminal
-2-
Page 2 of 2
Revision Application, contending that the applicant has not approached the appropriate forum for seeking renewal of passport and the unblocking of the CNIC of her husband, who has been declared an absconder /proclaimed offender cannot be granted . They plead dismissal of the instant criminal revision.
5. Heard learned counsel for the applicant as well as learned DAG and Deputy PG for the State , and perused the material available on record.
6. Admittedly, the instant Criminal Revision Application has been filed under Sections 435 and 439 Cr.P.C., and the scope and contours of the two sections are limited. Under Section 435 Cr.P.C., the High Court may call for and examine the record of any proceeding before any inferior Criminal Cour t or deal with matters as to the correctness, legality or propriety of any finding, etc. Under Secti on 439 CrPC, the High Court ’s power of revision is limited to the exercise of its powers as prescribed in the section itself. The High Court will mainly not be inclined to travel beyond the parameters specified in the two sections. Even if this Court were to invoke its inherent jurisdiction under Section 561 -A Cr.P.C., the relief sought by the Applicant , in the present facts and circumstances of the case, is against the State and cannot be granted outside the contours of Section 561-A.
7. In the circumstances, we do not find any material irregularity or any other defect in the impugned Order . Given the limited criminal jurisdiction and relief claimed, the trial Court rightly dismissed the application. Yet the applicant preferred to continue to seek relief by way of this criminal revision, and for the reasons discussed above, this bench is constrained to grant relief at this forum, too. Even otherwise, as a Regular Bench of the High Court, no relief could be granted to the applicant. Accordingly, the instant Criminal Revision Application is dismissed. The applicant may avail the remedy as indicated before the proper forum , as this Court finds no justification to interfere in the impugned Order.
Judge