Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: MUHAMMAD ARIF VS Respondent: MUHAMMAD RAFIQUEHonorable Justice Abdul Shakoor ParachaMian M. Waseem,Ibad-ur-Rehman Lodhi
2005 M L D 1481
2005 M L D 1481
[Lahore]
Before Abdul Shakoor Paracha, J
MUHAMMAD ARIF---Petitioner
Versus
MUHAMMAD RAFIQUE---Respondent
Writ Petition No.1442 of 2004, decided on 1st December, 2004.
Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979)---
----Ss. 10 & 11---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.452 & 506---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.199---Constitutional petition---Quashing of complaint---Alleged abductee who was daughter of complainant, had entered into Nikah with accused with her free-will and consent and Nikah was duly registered with the Registrar---Magistrate did not make any inquiry from any Police Officer regarding alleged occurrence---Matter was not reported by complainant to' the police---Complaint was lodged with delay of about 6 days and said extraordinary delay was not explained---Despite the fact that all accused were armed with pistols, knife and Dandas, not a single injury was sustained by complainant---Complaint seemed to be the result of enmity between the parties because alleged abductee being sui juris had contracted marriage with accused with her own free consent which had annoyed the complainant---Complainant initially got a case registered under Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979 against accused, but same was cancelled on the basis of statement of alleged abductee recorded under S. 164, Cr.P.C.---Filing of complaint and proceedings on basis of said complaint seemed to be with mala fide intention and without due process of law---Proceedings pending on the basis of complaint filed by complainant under Ss. 452 & 506, P.P.C. before Civil Judge/Judicial Magistrate, were quashed, in circumstances.
Mian M. Waseem for Petitioner.
Ibad-ur-Rehman Lodhi for Respondent.
Date of hearing: 1st December, 2004.
ORDER
Abida Parveen daughter of Muhammad Rafique-respondent No.1 being sui juris contracted Nikah with Muhammad Arif petitioner on 26-5-2003 with her free-will and consent. Nikah was registered with Nikah Registrar of Ward No.69/11, Union Council, Baldia Sheikhupura.
A copy of the Nikahnama is annexed along with this petition as Annexure `D'. Muhammad Rafique developed grudge with the petitioner and got a case registered against him vide F.I.R. No.198, dated 2-6-2003 under sections 10/11 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance VII of 1979, with Police Station Manawala, District Sheikhupura. On 12-6-2003, Mst. Abida Parveen got her statement recorded under section 164, Cr.P.C. in which she stated that she was never abducted by anyone and she has contracted, marriage/Nikah with her free consent with Muhammad Arif, petitioner and she is his legally wedded wife. On the basis of Nikahnama and statement under section 164, Cr.P.C. the Police/S.H.O. proceeded to cancel the F.I.R. Being aggrieved with the cancellation of the case and the marriage of his daughter, Mst. Abida Parveen with Muhammad Arif, respondent No.1 posing himself to be the resident of Ward No.3 Sohawa Tehsil Sohawa, District Jhelum lodged a complaint against Abdul Ghani, Muhammad Arif, Bashir Ahmed, Muhammad Siddique and Ibrahim. It was alleged that on 16-9-2003, when the complainant was working in Tariq Bakery Sohawa Abdul Ghani son of Muhammad Inayat armed with pistol Muhammad Arif son of Bashir Ahmed armed with pistol, Bashir Ahmed son of Kamal armed with knife, Muhammad Siddique son of Ghulam Muhammad and Ibrahim son of Sultan both armed with Dandas reached there and raised a Lalkara to kill the complainant. He was able to rescue his life by entering into a house. The accused extended threats. The occurrence was witnessed by Muhammad Amjad and Allah Yar. The Magistrate examined the complainant, Allah Yar son of Murid Ahmed and Muhammad Amjad and summoned the petitioner and his co-accused for the offence under sections 452/506, P.P.C.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the complainant Muhammad Rafique was not the resident of Ward No.3, Sohawa, Tehsil Sohawa District Jhelum. A false complaint has been lodged against the petitioner and his co-accused with a mala fide intention because Mst. Abida Parveen, the daughter of the complainant has contracted Nikah with the petitioner with her free consent. In spite of the fact that all the persons were allegedly armed with pistols, Knife and Dandas not a single injury was sustained by the complainant. Lastly, contends that the proceedings are without due process of law.
3. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the complainant contends that the petitioner owe more than 20,000 rupees to the complainant which was paid to Mst. Abida Parveen and the same has not been returned to him. Further contends that petitioner along with his co-accused while armed with deadly weapons made a murderous assault on him and he was able to escape by entering into a room. They extended threats, therefore, the Magistrate has rightly summoned the petitioner on the basis of the preliminary evidence.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record with their assistance.
5. Admitted position on the record is that Mst. Abida Parveen A daughter of Muhammad Rafique, respondent No.2 entered into Nikah on 26-5-2003 with her free-will and consent which Nikah was registered with Nikah Registrar of Ward No.69/11, Union Council Baldia Sheikhupura, i.e. Exh.D. Respondent Muhammad Rafique was not the resident of Ward No.3, Sohawa, Tehsil Sohawa District Jhelum.
6. The Magistrate did not make any inquiry to any Police Officer regarding the alleged occurrence. The matter was not reported by Muhammad Rafique, complainant to the Police. The alleged occurrence took place at 9-00 p.m. on 16-9-2003 but the complaint was lodged on 22-9-2003 with the delay of about 6 days. There was no explanation for lodging the complaint with extraordinary delay. Notwithstanding the fact that all the accused were armed with Pistols, Knife and Dandas, not a single injury was sustained by the complainant. The complaint seems to be the result of enmity between the parties because Mst. Abida Parveen being sui juris contracted marriage with the petitioner Muhammad Arif B with her own free consent which has annoyed the respondent. He initially got a case registered under the Hudood Ordinance against the petitioner but the same was cancelled on the basis of the statement by Mst. Abida Parveen recorded under section 164, Cr.P.C.
7. Filing of the complaint and the proceedings on the basis of the said complaint seems to be with mala fide and without due process of law, therefore, by allowing this petition, the proceedings pending on the basis of the complaint filed by Muhammad Rafique, respondent No.1 complainant under section 452/506, P.P.C. before the Civil Judge/Judicial Magistrate Sohawa are hereby quashed.
H.B.T./M-1078/L Complaint quashed.