1995 P Cr (PLP)

Muhammad Azam v. Muhammad Iqbal PLD 1984 SC 95 ref. Mahmood Ahmad Alwavi for Petitioner. Ghulam Murtaza Khan Ch. for Respondent No.2. Date of hearing: 8th May, 1995. Javaid Iqbal, petitioner, through this petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan seeks quashment of F.I.R. No.110, dated 30-11-1994 under section 16 of Ordinance VII of 1979 registered with Police Station Factory Area, Sargodha, being illegal, false, fabricated, misconceived, result of highhandedness and mala fide.

2. The facts briefly stated are that Muhammad Ashfaq, respondent No.2 got the impugned F.I.R. registered for the abduction of his wife, namely, Amtal Bibi by Javed Iqbal, the present petitioner.

3. It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that he never abducted Mst. Anital Bibi; she in her statement under section 164, Cr.P.C. before the learned Magistrate stated that she was never abducted by the present petitioner and the, impugned F.I.R. was got registered due to filing of suit for dissolution of marriage against the complainant on 1-6-1994. Further argued that the impugned F.I.R. was lodged on 30-11-1994 while Mst. Amtal Bibi had disclosed in her statement under section 164, Cr.P.C. that her suit for dissolution of marriage is pending-since 1-6-1994 before the learned Judge, Family Court at Mianwali and, the complainant had threatened her prior to lodging the F.I.R. not to pursue her suit, otherwise she will have to face the dire consequences. According to the learned counsel, this shows the false implication of the petitioner when particularly the complainant has not disclosed in the F.I.R. about the pendency of the family suit 'against him.

4. The petition was resisted by learned counsel for respondent No.2 by arguing, that in fact the present petitioner has abducted the wife of his client and in the .facts and circumstances of this case when a criminal case stands registered; without investigation of the same, quashment of the F.I.R. at such an initial stage is unwarranted,and uncalled for. '

5. I have heard learned counsel for both the sides at length and have gone through the record with their able assistance and care. The impugned F.I.R. in this case -was got registered on 30-11-1994 while the alleged occurrence of abduction of his wife took place on 30-3-1994 eight months prior. The explanation offered is that he had been trying for the return of his wife on Baradari basis. It is noteable that the alleged abductee Mst. Amtal Bibi had filed a suit, for dissolution of marriage before the Judge, Family Court at Mianwali on 1-6-1994 and the complainant, respondent No.2 appeared before the Court and fled written statement on 29-6-1994. He also got his statement recorded before the learned Judge, Family Court on 6-7-1994 in which he did not at all mention that his wife was ever abducted by the present petitioner. He only stated that his nephew Mumtaz had seen some bad activity and then Mst. Aortal Bibi left for Sialkot from where she was brought back and then started living at Soni Pura, Sargodha. Further in the written statement, in reply to para. 4 he submitted that Mst. Aortal Bibi had disappeared at the instance of Javed Ghuman. A certified copy of the order; dated 18-1-1995 of the learned Judge, Family Court has also been placed on record according to which last opportunity has been given to the complainant, respondent No.2, for the production of witnesses.

6. In the above peculiar facts and circumstances of this case, I am of the view that the F.I.R. has been lodged for mala fide purposes when the alleged a abductee had fled a civil suit which is pending before a competent Court. It is now settled principle of law that when a case is pending in a Family Court for adjudication, the criminal proceedings are stayed till the determination of the, suit. Relying upon the authoritative pronouncement of the Honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of Muhammad Azam v. Muhammad Iqbal PLD 1984 SC 95, the investigation of case F.1.R. No.110, dated 30-11-1994 registered with Police Station Factory Area, Sargodha shall remain stayed till such time the suit is decided by the learned Judge, Family Court, Mianwali who shall dispose of the same within four months. A copy of the judgment shall be forwarded by the learned Judge, Family Court, Mianwali to S.H.O., Police Station Factory Area, Sargodha who shall proceed then in accordance with law in the light of judgment of the learned Judge, Family Court. With these directions, writ petition stands disposed of with no order as to costs. N.H.Q./J-104/L Order accordingly.