PCRLJ 2004

2004 P Cr (PLP)

Mst. AFSHAN PERVEEN — Petitioner Versus S.H.O., POLICE STATION QUTABPUR, MULTAN and 2 others — Respondents

Jurisdiction / Court
Lahore
Decided Date
2003-October-2
Honorable Judges
N/A
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2004 P Cr (PLP)
Forum / Court Lahore
Bench Members N/A
Parties Mst. AFSHAN PERVEEN — Petitioner Versus S.H.O., POLICE STATION QUTABPUR, MULTAN and 2 others — Respondents
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2004 P Cr (PLP)?

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

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2004 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: 2004 P Cr (PLP) (Mst. AFSHAN PERVEEN — Petitioner Versus S.H.O., POLICE STATION QUTABPUR, MULTAN and 2 others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Representation

  • Ch. Muhammad Jamil for Petitioner.

Headnotes / Summary

S. 11

Constitution of Pakistan (1973); Art. 199--Constitutional petition

Quashing of F.I.R.

Allegation in F.I.R. was that co-accused alongwith others had abducted the victim girl for the purpose of committing Zina

Petitioner/accused had contended that she being sui juris had contracted marriage with co-accused and Nikahnama was duly registered

Medical report revealed that accused was a sui juris and had reached the age of majority

Accused being sui juris had lawfully married with co-accused of her own choice, of her own accord and free-will, no offence as alleged in the F.I.R. thus had been made out against him

Conviction of accused in circumstances was not possible and continuation of investigation against accused would simply amount to unnecessary harassment

Law did mot prohibit a sui juris girl from marrying a person of her own choice- and living with him as a legally wedded wife--Such was her Constitutional guarantee which could not be taken away

High Court, in Constitutional jurisdiction could interfere in larger interest of justice and could quash criminal, investigation if it would come to the conclusion that 'continuation of criminal investigation would not serve any purpose

F.I.R. registered against accused was quashed, in circumstances.

Judgment & Decree

Ch. Muhammad Jamil for Petitioner. Syed Hashmat Hussain Naqvi for the State. This is a petition for quashment of F.I.R. No.339, dated 21-12-2002 registered under section 11 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance VII of 1979 at Police Station Qutabpur, Multan.

2. As per allegation in the F.I.R. on 18-12-2002 when the complainant and his wife returned home after day's work, they found that their daughter was missing and on inquiry, they were told that one Mst. Saira, daughter of Manzoor alongwith Nadeem and Sabir had taken away Mst. Afshan Perveen on a motorcycle rickshaw for the purpose of committing Zina.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that petitioner has contracted marriage with Muhammad Nadeem on 6-12-2002 according to the Injunctions of Islam. Nikahnama is duly registered hence no offence has been committed by the petitioner and her husband. Further submits that petitioner had filed Writ Petition No.21707 of 2002- against -the S.H.O. Police Station Ferozewala seeking a direction not to cause harassment to the petitioner and her husband wherein she had categorically taken a stand that she being sui juris and had contracted marriage with Nadeem of her own accord and free-will; that according to a certificate issued from the Office of-M.S. D.H.Q. Hospital No. 1, Lahore, dated 3-1-2003, the age of the petitioner is about 17 years and also in a certificate issued by the panel of three specialists; the 'opinion is that as per her X-Ray report, she is about 17/18 years of age. 4: Conversely, learned counsel for State has opposed this petition and submitted that petitioner is under age. 5.. In my opinion, the petitioner is a sui juris and has reached the age of majority. The medical report had disclosed that her age is about 17/18 years. As she being sui juris had lawfully married a person of her own choice of her own accord and free-will and no offence as alleged in the F.I.R. is made out. Conviction of the accused in the circumstances; is not. possible and continuance of investigation under these circumstances against the petitioner and other co-accused will simply 'amount. to unnecessary harassment. The prosecution of the petitioner and her husband amounts to mala fide, action on the part of the Investigating Agency in collusion with the complainant party and is just to harass the petitioner and her husband. Law does not prohibit a sui juris girl from marrying a person of her own choice and living them a legally-wedded wife as husband and wife. This is their Constitutional guarantee and it cannot be taken away by anyone. It is the duty of the State to protect the marriage, the family, the mother and the child. I have gone through the citations cited at the bar. This Court in a Constitutional/ jurisdiction can interfere in the larger interest of justice and can quash the criminal investigation if it comes to the conclusion that continuance of the criminal, investigation will not serve any purpose.

6. In view of what has been discussed above, this petition is allowed and F.1.R. No. 339, dated 21-12-2002 registered under section 11 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance VII of 1979IB at Police Station Qutabpur, Multan, is hereby quashed. H.B.T./A-992/L Petition allowed.