1985 PLP 684 (SCMR)
BASHIR AHMAD MALIK — Petitioner Versus THE STATE and another — Respondents
| Citation | 1985 PLP 684 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Haleem, C.J., Aslam Riaz Hussain, Nasim Hasan Shah and Shafiur Rahman, JJ |
| Parties | BASHIR AHMAD MALIK — Petitioner Versus THE STATE and another — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1985 PLP 684 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1985 PLP 684 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Muhammad Haleem, C.J., Aslam Riaz Hussain, Nasim Hasan Shah and Shafiur Rahman, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1985 PLP 684 (SCMR) (BASHIR AHMAD MALIK — Petitioner Versus THE STATE and another — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Sh. Zamir Hussain, Advocate Supreme Court with Sh. Salahuddin, Advocate-on-Record (absent) for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondent No.2.
- Date of hearing: 27th November, 1984.
- Sh. Zamir Hussain, Advocate Supreme Court with Sh. Salahuddin, Advocate‑on‑Record (absent) for Petitioner.
- K.E. Bhatti, Advocate Supreme Court for the State.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment of the Lahore High Court, dated 3-10-1984 passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 110-Q of 1984).
Art.185 (3)--Petition for special leave to appeal--Parties found by Supreme Court litigating merely to harass each other and respondent had filed criminal case against petitioner as a counterblast to civil suit filed against him--Petitioner stating that second suit could be withdrawn if criminal case filed by respondent was also withdrawn--Respondent not turning up despite notice thus making evident that he was not interested in pursuing criminal case filed by him--Supreme Court while feeling that whole affair was merely an exercise in futility, converted petition into appeal and quash criminal proceedings against petitioner and his co-accused pending in Court of a Magistrate. K.E. Bhatti, Advocate Supreme Court for the State.
Judgment & Decree
ASLAM RIAZ HUSSAIN, J.‑‑ Bashir Ahmad Malik petitioner has filed the present petition for leave to appeal against the judgment of the Lahore High Court, dated 3‑10‑1984, dismissing his quashment application under section 561‑A, Cr.P.C..
2. The facts, briefly, are that one Mst. Mumtaz Begum claimed to be the widow of Din Muhammad (the father of Musarrat Hussain Nadeem respondent No.2) and filed a declaratory suit against Musarrat Hussain Nadeem, in a Civil Court at Faisalabad, claiming her share in his property. On the other hand Musarrat Hussain Nadeem respondent No.2, lodged a report with the police on 7‑10‑1984, alleging that Bashir Ahmad Malik petitioner and his co‑accused Rashid had forged a false Nikahnama in connivance with the afore‑mentioned Mst. Mumtaz purporting to showing that she was lawfully wedded wife of late Din Muhammad. While the civil case filed by Mst. Mumtaz Begum was pending trial in a civil Court at Faisalabad, the criminal case got registered by Musarrat Hussain Nadeem against the petitioner and his co‑accused was pending trial before a Magistrate 1st Class at Faisalabad.
3. Better sense prevailed and both the parties decided to withdraw their respective cases. Mst. Mumtaz Begum, therefore, withdrew her suit while Musarrat Hussain Nadeem :espondent moved the District Magistrate for the withdrawal of the criminal case against Bashir Ahmad Malik and his co‑accused. But that application was not allowed. Mst. Mumtaz Begum thereupon filed the second suit in the civil Court against Musarrat Hussain Nadeem respondent while Bashir Ahmed Malik petitioner filed an application for quashment of the criminal proceedings against him, which was disallowed vide the impugned judgment. Hence the present petition.
4. We issued notice to the State as well as Musarrat Hussain Nadeem, respondent. The latter has not turned up. As such we have heard the learned counsel for Bashir Ahmad Malik petitioner. and the learned State counsel.
5. Ater hearing them and going through the relevant portions of the evidence 4n the record we find that both the parties were litigating merely to harass each other and that Musarrat Hussain Nadeem has filed the criminal case as a counterblast to the civil suit filed against him by Mst. Mumtaz Begum.
6. During the course of argument the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that Mst. Mumtaz Begum would withdraw even the second suit if the criminal case filed by Musarrat Hussain Nadeem against her and the other accused, is withdrawn. Since Musarrat Hussain Nadeem respondent has not turned up despite notice it is evident that he is not interested in pursuing the criminal case against the petitioner and his co‑accused in the trial Court. As such the whole affair shall merely be an exercise in futility. We, therefore, feel that in the circum stances of the case it is proper to quash the criminal proceedings' against Bashir Ahmad Malik and his co‑accused pending in the Court of Mr. Muhammad Ashraf Nauria, M.I.C., Faisalabad.
7. We, therefore, convert the petition into appeal, allow the same and quash the criminal proceedings against the petitioner and his co‑accused, pending in the Court of above‑mentioned Magistrate at Faisalabad. M. Z. M. Proceedings quashed.