2002 PLP 1027 (CLC)

(c) Words and phrases

"Legal right", means a right, which is created, recognised and enforceable by law. Malik Saeed Hassan for Appellant. The appellant filed Writ Petition No.5478 of 2001 with the following prayer:-- It is, therefore, most respectfully and humbly prayed that writ petition may very kindly be accepted and a direction may be issued to respondents Nos. l to 5 to see to it that the fake and fraudulent motorcyclists team comprising Muhammad Yasin, Muhammad Saleh and their accompalices should not be allowed to depart from the country and respondents may kindly be further directed to register a cognizable case against the abvoementioned accused persons for commission of offences of fraud, cheating and forgery under the relevant provisions of P.P.C. It is further prayed that a direction may also be issued to respondent No.2 or the accused person Muhammad Yasin son of Rehmat Ullah Block, 399/6 Engine Shed, Lahore to produce before this august Court the letter received from the British Authorities/ Prime Minister Tony Blair. It is further prayed that pending the decision of this writ petition, a direction may be issued to the respondents Nos. l to 3 not to allow the accused person/fake motorcyclists team to leave the country or fled away and to put their names on the control list."

2. The aforesaid writ petition was dismissed by the learned. Single Judge vide impugned order, dated 18-9-2001. The learned counsel of the appellant submits that the appellant organized the motorcycle rally as is evident from the report and parawise comments filed by the Inspector -General of Police. The respondents constituted a team consisting of four persons who were not initially members of the motorcycle rally and excluded the petitioners without any justification and wanted to go outside the country to organize motorcycle rally. He further submits, that respondents are restrained to send the aforesaid team as the appellants who had initially organized the motorcycle rally should be allowed to go alongwith the aforesaid team. The appellants shall bear expenses from their own pocket.

3. We have considered the contentions of the learned counsel of the appellant and perused the record ourselves.

4. The appellants had organized the motorcycle rally not under the administration of the respondents functionaries. The appellants did not base their legal right on any law coupled with the fact that the contents of the Intra-Court Appeal. Writ petition and the impugned order reveal that, it is a dispute between the real brothers which cannot be resolved in Constitutional petition. It is pertinent to mention here that the term `legal right' means a right which is recognized, created by law and is enforceable by law. The Court can enforce only that right which is a legal right and not simply a moral right, however, strong may be the urge to enforce it in view of its moral ascendancy appellants' counsel failed to point out any legal right of the appellants. The learned Single Judge was justified to dismiss the Constitution petition.

5. In view of what has been discussed above, we do not find any illegality or infirmity in the impugned order. The Intra-Court Appeal has no merits. The same is dismissed. S.A.K./M-864/L Appeal dismissed.