2008 PLP 951 (MLD)
MUHAMMAD RAMZAN — Petitioner Versus ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE, KHUSHAB and 3 others — Respondents
| Citation | 2008 PLP 951 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD RAMZAN — Petitioner Versus ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE, KHUSHAB and 3 others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2008 PLP 951 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2008 PLP 951 (MLD)?
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: 2008 PLP 951 (MLD) (MUHAMMAD RAMZAN — Petitioner Versus ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE, KHUSHAB and 3 others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Naseem Ullah Khan Niazi for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
Ss. 22-A & 22-B
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.199
Constitutional petition
Petitioner had sought registration of criminal case against respondent on the charge that he had played a fraud with the petitioner with regard to marriage of petitioner with a certain woman
Petitioner had alleged that respondent had received two lacs of rupees, but woman with whom his marriage had taken place, after remaining some days with him left his house and did not return
Application filed by the petitioner to the Justice of Peace for registration of criminal case against respondent was also dismissed
Best course in circumstances for the petitioner was to first file suit for restitution\f conjugal rights
No case for interference having been made out, constitutional petition was dismissed.
Judgment & Decree
KHAWAJA MUHAMMAD SHARIF, J.
This is a writ petition for the registration of case. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that respondent No.4 played a fraud with the petitioner, that he took rupees two lacs from the petitioner on the pretext that he will contract his marriage with one lady, thereafter, marriage took place on 21-6-2007 but later on, Parveen wife of the petitioner after remaining some days with the petitioner left his house and did not return back. He submits that in fact Fateh Ullah respondents No.4 played a fraud with the petitioner.
2. Heard. Petitioner had also submitted an application to the Justice of Peace for the registration of case against Fateh Ullah respondent No.4 but the same was dismissed. The best course of the petitioner was to first file suit for restitution of conjugal right and the same was held by learned Additional Sessions Judge in his order impugned. No case for interference by this Court is made out; therefore this petition is dismissed in limine. H.B.T./M-54/L Petition dismissed.