PCRLJ 1993

1993 P Cr (PLP)

SAFIA NOUREEN — Petitioner Versus S.H.O. and others — Respondents

Jurisdiction / Court
Lahore
Decided Date
1993-January-11
Honorable Judges
N/A
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 1993 P Cr (PLP)
Forum / Court Lahore
Bench Members N/A
Parties SAFIA NOUREEN — Petitioner Versus S.H.O. and others — Respondents
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1993 P Cr (PLP)?

This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1993 P Cr (PLP)?

The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: N/A.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 1993 P Cr (PLP) (SAFIA NOUREEN — Petitioner Versus S.H.O. and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Representation

  • Imran Aziz Qureshi for Petitioner.

Headnotes / Summary

Art. 199

Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.380

Neither the report of the S.H.O. denying the alleged harassment by him was found to be incorrect, nor High Court could go into the allegations of the registration of the case under S.380, P.P.C. being mala fide

Petitioner or, for that matter, any other person interested in the prosecution of said case on behalf of the defence at investigation stage was, however, at liberty to put forward the defence plea before the concerned quarters

Constitutional petition was dismissed with such observations.

Judgment & Decree

Art. 199

Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.380

Neither the report of the S.H.O. denying the alleged harassment by him was found to be incorrect, nor High Court could go into the allegations of the registration of the case under S.380, P.P.C. being mala fide

Petitioner or, for that matter, any other person interested in the prosecution of said case on behalf of the defence at investigation stage was, however, at liberty to put forward the defence plea before the concerned quarters

Constitutional petition was dismissed with such observations. Imran Aziz Qureshi for Petitioner. The allegations regarding harassment being caused to the petitioner and/or her in-laws by the respondent-Station House Officer, Police Station Jaranwala have been denied by the latter in his report received in the office as far back as on 8-12-1992. It was specifically mentioned against para.7 of the writ petition that no case stands registered against the petitioner or her in-laws and that no complaint was then pending at the police station.

2. It has been argued that a case was subsequently registered at the instance of Muhammad Boota, brother of Safia Naureen petitioner at Police Station Jaranwala under section 380, P.P.C. and that the accused mentioned in the said case are on bail. The in-laws of the petitioner filed a petition bearing W.P. No.15 of 1993 which was disposed of on 4-1-1993 with a direction to the Superintendent of Police, Faisalabad to assign the investigation to some other agency. The contention is that all these proceedings were the result of the connivance of petitioner's father and brother with the respondent-Station House officer who fell prey to their desire to snap the marital tie between the petitioner and her husband, Muhammad Nadeem. It is however, not denied that the case under section 380, P.P.C. was registered on 25-12-1992 and allegations therein that the occurrence took place one and a half months prior to the said date, are being investigated by the concerned quarters after the Superintendent of Police, Faisalabad, was directed by this Court in Writ Petition No.15 of 1993 on the petition of the accused therein.

3. That being the position, neither the report submitted by the respondent-Station House Officer is found to be incorrect nor this Court can go into the allegations presently made by the petitioner to the effect that the registration of case F.I.R. No.774 dated 24-12-1992 at Police Station Jaranwala under section 380, P.P.C. at the instance of the petitioner's brother, is mala fide. The petitioner or, for that matter, any, other person interested in the prosecution of that case on behalf of the defence at investigation stage, is at liberty to put forward the defence plea before the concerned quarters. With the above observation, this petition is dismissed in limine. N.H.O./S-259/L Petition dismissed.