1990 P Cr (PLP)
KHURSHID BEGUM — Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD SHARIF and 3 others — Respondents
| Citation | 1990 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | KHURSHID BEGUM — Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD SHARIF and 3 others — Respondents |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1990 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1990 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: 1990 P Cr (PLP) (KHURSHID BEGUM — Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD SHARIF and 3 others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Shuja-ud-Din for Petitioner
- S.A. Rashid for Respondent No.3
Headnotes / Summary
S. 491
Mother filed application for recovery of her married daughter against husband, father and other nearest relatives of alleged detenu
Court not satisfied that detenu was in any manner detained against her wishes
Application dismissed as without merit.
Judgment & Decree
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 887-H of 1978, decided on 2nd December 1978 Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
S. 491
Mother filed application for recovery of her married daughter against husband, father and other nearest relatives of alleged detenu
Court not satisfied that detenu was in any manner detained against her wishes
Application dismissed as without merit. Shuja-ud-Din for Petitioner S.A. Rashid for Respondent No.3 This application under section 491, Cr.P.C. came up before me on 22-11-1978. This is for the recovery of one Mst. Harridan Bibi. Respondents arrayed are four in number. Respondent No.1 is the elder brother of the husband of the alleged detenu. Muhammad Hussain respondent No.2, I am informed, is the Khaloo of the detenu. Respondent No.3 Muhammad Siddique is the father and respondent No.4 Abdul Hamid is the husband of the detenu. Petitioner has levelled somewhat strange allegations in her application against the respondents. It is stated that the detenu was married with respondent No.4 some three years before `on the sole desire of the father:. I was not inclined to admit this petition to hearing and order recovery of the alleged detenu from the respondents, when this matter was before me in motion. I issued notice only to respondent No.3 with a view to find out the possibility of a compromise between the petitioner and her husband respondent No.3. Respondent No.3 is present in person. He is also accompanied by Taj, real brother of the petitioner. Petitioner admitted before me that she gave birth to ten children out of the wedlock of Muhammad Siddiq respondent. Muhammad Siddiq respondent is keen to take the petitioner with him so that the family life is not spoiled. Petitioner's brother Taj is also anxious that his sister joins her husband. I have generally questioned her. She is adamant to stay away from her family. In these circumstances, I am not prepared to call the detenu at her instance. I am not at all satisfied that the detenu is, in any manner, detained against her wishes. Respondent No.3 has informed me that presently she is living happily with her husband. This petition has no merit and is' dismissed accordingly. 14.B.T./K-223/L Petition dismissed.