2010 PLP 178 (YLR)
Mst. AFSHAN alias AAPI — Petitioner Versus DISTRICT POLICE OFFICER, JAMSHORO and 7 others — Respondents
| Citation | 2010 PLP 178 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | Abdur Rehman Faruq Pirzada, J |
| Parties | Mst. AFSHAN alias AAPI — Petitioner Versus DISTRICT POLICE OFFICER, JAMSHORO and 7 others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2010 PLP 178 (YLR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2010 PLP 178 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: Abdur Rehman Faruq Pirzada, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2010 PLP 178 (YLR) (Mst. AFSHAN alias AAPI — Petitioner Versus DISTRICT POLICE OFFICER, JAMSHORO and 7 others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Muhammad Sachal R. Awan for Petitioner.
- Allah Bachayo Soomro, Addl. A.-G. along with Inspector, Rafique Ahmad Khan on behalf of D.P.O. Hyderabad, S.I.P. Qadir Bux Laghari, S.H.O. P.S. Jamshoro on behalf of D.P.O., Jamshoro and S.I.P. Tahir Khanzada S.H.O., P.S. G.O.R., Hyderabad for Respondents Nos.1 to 4.
- Muhammad Ishtiaq Khan for Respondents Nos.5 and 7.
- Learned Additional A.G. states on behalf of the Official respondents that no undue harassment whatsoever has been caused to the petitioner party; she is free to approach th8 Police Officers in connection with her grievance, and that whatever action will be taken, the same will be take strictly in accordance with law. He has also stated that any protection required under the law, will be provided to her. It has also been stated by the Police Officers present that respondent No.5 Soomar has registered F.I.R. No.138/2009 under sections 365-B, 366-A and 34 P.P.C. against one Gamoon and others, with whom the petitioner is stated to have married. The learned Counsel for petitioner has stated that petitioner has lawfully married with Gamoon and there is no question of her abduction by her husband Gamoon. Learned Additional A.G. has suggested that Investigating Officer may be directed to arrange for production of petitioner before the concerned Magistrate for recording her 164 Cr.P.C. statement, whereafter the case may be disposed of according to law.
Headnotes / Summary
Art. 199
Constitutional petition
Official respondents had stated that petitioner never appeared before them in respect of any grievance; however, in case she would appear before the concerned Police Officers, then the action in accordance with law would be taken
Police Officers present in the court had stated that respondent had registered F.I.R. under Ss. 365-B & 366-A/34, P.P.C. against one with whom the petitioner was stated to have married
Counsel for the petitioner had stated that petitioner had lawfully married with accused and that there was no question of her abduction by her husband/accused
State Counsel had suggested that Investigating Officer could be directed to arrange for production of petitioner before the concerned Magistrate for recording her statement under S.164, Cr.P.C., whereafter the case could be disposed of according to law
Investigating Officer was directed by High Court to conduct fair and impartial investigation and produce the petitioner before the concerned Magistrate so that her statement under S.164, Cr.P.C. could be recorded; whereafter the case could be disposed of strictly in accordance with law
In the meantime the petitioner and accused would not be arrested by the Police.
Judgment & Decree
ABDUR REHMAN FARUQ PIRZADA, J.
It has been stated by the Official respondents that petitioner never appeared before them in respect of any grievance; however, in case she appears before the concerned Police Officers, then the action in accordance with law will be taken. Learned Additional A.G. states on behalf of the Official respondents that no undue harassment whatsoever has been caused to the petitioner party; she is free to approach th8 Police Officers in connection with her grievance, and that whatever action will be taken, the same will be take strictly in accordance with law. He has also stated that any protection required under the law, will be provided to her. It has also been stated by the Police Officers present that respondent No.5 Soomar has registered F.I.R. No.138/2009 under sections 365-B, 366-A and 34 P.P.C. against one Gamoon and others, with whom the petitioner is stated to have married. The learned Counsel for petitioner has stated that petitioner has lawfully married with Gamoon and there is no question of her abduction by her husband Gamoon. Learned Additional A.G. has suggested that Investigating Officer may be directed to arrange for production of petitioner before the concerned Magistrate for recording her 164 Cr.P.C. statement, whereafter the case may be disposed of according to law. In these circumstances the Investigating Officer is directed to conduct fair and impartial investigation, and produce the petitioner before the concerned Magistrate, so that her statement under section 164 Cr.P.C. may be recorded, whereafter the case may be disposed of strictly in accordance with law. In the meantime, the petitioner and said Gamoon shall not be arrested by Police. In the above terms, this petition stands disposed of. H.B.T./A-156/K Order accordingly.