1989 PLP 4037 (MLD)
RIASAT ALI‑‑Petitioner Versus S.H.O. and others‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 1989 PLP 4037 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Khalil‑ur‑Rehman Khan, J |
| Parties | RIASAT ALI‑‑Petitioner Versus S.H.O. and others‑‑Respondents |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 PLP 4037 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1989 PLP 4037 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Khalil‑ur‑Rehman Khan, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 PLP 4037 (MLD) (RIASAT ALI‑‑Petitioner Versus S.H.O. and others‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Malik Amjed Pervaiz for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑Art. 199‑‑Constitutional jurisdiction‑‑Discretionary relief‑‑Alleged detenu recovered by police under warrants and produced before Magistrate‑‑Fact about recovery of alleged detenu by police under warrant issued by Magistrate was deliberately concealed by petitioner‑‑Petitioner, held, had disentitled himself to seek discretionary relief from Court in exercise of its Constitutional jurisdiction‑ Petition dismissed in limine in circumstances.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑‑Art. 199‑‑Constitutional jurisdiction‑‑Discretionary relief‑‑Alleged detenu recovered by police under warrants and produced before Magistrate‑‑Fact about recovery of alleged detenu by police under warrant issued by Magistrate was deliberately concealed by petitioner‑‑Petitioner, held, had disentitled himself to seek discretionary relief from Court in exercise of its Constitutional jurisdiction‑ Petition dismissed in limine in circumstances. Malik Amjed Pervaiz for Petitioner. The main grievance disclosed in this petition is that on the evening of 19th January, 1989 Mst. Kaneez Begum, respondent No.4 came to the house of the brother of the petitioner for staying there for the night and next morning on 20‑1‑1989 Muhammad Boota respondent No.2 and Muhammad Ishaq, respondent No.3 came there with police officials of Police Station Wahndo and illegally committed trespass into the house of the brother of the petitioner and forcibly took away Shakeela Bibi and Shaukat Ali with them to police station. It was asserted that Rs.20,000 and golden ornaments were also removed from the house and that Shaukat Ali was being confined in the police station without registering any case against him.
2. The S.H.O. Police Station Wahndo, was directed to submit report and parawise comments. The same has been submitted. The position taken is that in pursuance to the warrants issued on 15‑1‑1989 under section 100, Cr.P.C. by Rana Muhammad Tahir Khan, Magistrate 1st Class, Gujranwala, Mst. Shakeela Bibi vas recovered by the police and produced before the Magistrate on 21‑1‑1989. Mst. Shakeela Bibi in her statement made before the learned Magistrate expressed desire to accompany her parents. She was accordingly allowed to go with her parents.
3. These facts appear to have, been deliberately concealed. In these circumstances, it cannot be believed that the petitioner was not aware that Mst. Shakeela Bibi was recovered by police in pursuance to the warrants issued by the Magistrate. Such a conduct disentitles the petitioner to seek discretionary relief. I am, therefore, not inclined to interfere in exercise of Constitutional jurisdiction. The writ petition is dismissed in limine. S.A./R‑160/L Petition dismissed in limine.