P L D 2019 Lahore 380 (PLP)
Mst. FARHAT BIBI — Petitioner Versus STATION HOUSE OFFICER and others — Respondents
| Citation | P L D 2019 Lahore 380 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | Mst. FARHAT BIBI — Petitioner Versus STATION HOUSE OFFICER and others — Respondents |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in P L D 2019 Lahore 380 (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case P L D 2019 Lahore 380 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: P L D 2019 Lahore 380 (PLP) (Mst. FARHAT BIBI — Petitioner Versus STATION HOUSE OFFICER and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Afrasiab Mohal for Petitioner.
- Rana Tassawar Ali Khan, Additional Advocate General and Ch.Sarfraz Ahmad Khatana Deputy Prosecutor General on court's call.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 154
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 365-B
Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 199
Constitutional jurisdiction of the High Court
Scope
Quashing of FIR
Whether an abductee or prosecution witness of an FIR could seek quashing of FIR in Constitutional jurisdiction of the High Court
Held, that an abductee/witness of an FIR, was not an "aggrieved party" within the meaning of Art. 199 of the Constitution, as such, writ petition filed for quashing of same FIR on their behalf was not maintainable.
Ss. 154 & 497
Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 199
Quashing of FIR in constitutional jurisdiction of the High Court
Scope
Office objection requiring the petitioner to bring on file bail granting order before seeking quashing of FIR through Constitution petition
Obtaining bail from a court of competent jurisdiction before approaching the High Court in its constitutional jurisdiction for quashing of FIR may be a practice for facility or preference but surely it was not a requirement of any law.
Judgment & Decree
Mst. Farhat Bibi (petitioner) who is an abductee of case FIR No.178/2018 registered under section 365-B, P.P.C. at Police Station Shah Pur Sadar, Sargodha, through the instant writ petition has sought quashing of said FIR on multifarious grounds, but the office has raised objection on maintainability of constitutional petition for quashing of FIR without bringing on file the copy of bail granting order.
2. We have heard the respective arguments of learned counsel for the parties.
3. This court in another Office Objection No.245164 of 2018 "Mst. Nazia v. State through SHO, etc." (PLD 2019 Lahore 373) vide an order of even date has held that abductee/witness in an FIR, is not an "aggrieved party" within the meaning of Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, as such, writ petition for quashing of same FIR on their behalf is not maintainable. However, in the instant case office has not raised same objection, rather has raised an objection requiring the petitioner (irrespective whether he/she is abductee, witness or accused) to bring on file copy of bail granting order before approaching this court to seek quashing of FIR through writ petition. We are afraid, though it may be a practice for facility or preference but surely it is not the requirement of any law that petitioner before approaching this court in its constitutional jurisdiction for quashing of FIR may firstly obtain bail from a court of competent jurisdiction.
4. For what has been discussed above, the office objection being alien in the scheme of law, is not sustainable and is overruled. MWA/F-10/L Office objection overruled.