1997 P Cr (PLP)

Zaif-ul-Haq Ziay for Petitioner. Amir Muhammad for Respondent. Muhammad Anwar Bhoor, A.A.-G. This Constitutional petition is instituted for the quashment of F. I. R. No. 116 of 1996, dated 19-11-1996 registered at Police Station Kala Bagh, District Mianwali on the report of Makhmad Jan son of Mehrab Khan in which the petitioner Muzaffar Khan and three others are involved. It is alleged in the F.I.R. by the complainant that the aforesaid Muzaffar Khan alongwith Qayyum Khan, Naeem Khan and Rahim Khan while armed with fire-arms, forcibly took away his daughter Mst. Bibi Asia for committing Zina-bil-Jabr with her. The aforesaid abductee put up resistance during the aforesaid incident and was beaten by the accused persons by giving her fist and kick blows. Her cries attracted Mst. Durdana and Gul Marjana and they went after the accused to save the abductee. The accused including the petitioner, however, escaped from the spot while brandishing their fire-arms. They also threatened the complainant side with dire consequences: The background of the occurrence is that Muzaffar Khan, petitioner, had requested for the hand of the aforesaid abductee for his son Qayyum Khan accused. The complainant refused to marry his daughter to the aforesaid Qayyum whereupon all the accused in furtherance of their common intention committed the occurrence aforesaid. The matter was allegedly taken to the Jirga which delayed the F.1.R. for a little less than one day.

2. It is contended in the writ petition that the petitioner was working as a security guard at Rawalpindi and as such was never present at the time of occurrence in his village, while the other accused were also away from the village on the day of occurrence. The counter-version was put up in the writ petition saying that the complainant side had caught hold of his son and abused him on 16-10-1996 at about 5-(10 p.m. and had snatched some articles from him. A Jirga was to be summoned on 18-10-1996 after Jumma prayers to resolve the matter. However, a day earlier to the summoning of Jirga, two persons in white clothes alongwith 20 other police officials trespassed into the house of the petitioner and committed dacoity of the petitioner's weapon kept by the petitioner at his house. A Writ Petition No.19562 of 1996 was filed to that effect by the wife of the petitioner. Respondent No. l feeling aggrieved of the filing of writ petition allegedly got a case instituted from petitioner's opponent, namely, Islam Gull son of Taza Gul vide F.I.R. No. 100 of 1996, dated 19-10 1996. This case was registered against three persons including the petitioner's son Abdul Qayyum Khan and Abdur Rehman Khan. After the registration of that case a writ petition was filed by Abdul Qayyum, a son of the petitioner, for the quashment of said F.I.R. which was allegedly pending in this Court. Thereafter, the present case (F. I. R. No. 116) was allegedly got instituted by respondent No. 1 from respondent No.2 with the mala fide intention and to bring pressure upon the petitioners, so that he may enter into compromise in the aforesaid cases and writ petitions.

3. After stating the aforesaid facts the learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the complaint was prima facie tainted with mala fide and ill-will, as it would be highly improbable that the petitioner would ask for the hand of Bibi Asia for his son Qayyum Khan because previously his daughter Mst. Amal Jana was divorced by her husband Muhammad Ayub, a nephew of the complainant. With that background the petitioner would have allegedly never asked for the hand of the daughter of the complainant and as such the motive itself was a cock and bull story. As such it was prayed that the F.I.R. was not only false put mala fide and ought to be quashed. Learned counsel for the other side contended that the impugned F.I.R. was supported by the complainant as well as by the eye-witnesses and the abductee herself. The motive was a double edged weapon even according to the story put by the petitioner side. It is just possible that the petitioner side may have felt aggrieved of the divorce of Mst. Amal Jana and might have committed the occurrence with the object of dishonouring a lady of their opponents by abducting her. It is, therefore, contended that such like controversy can only be settled during the trial and the F.I.R. cannot be thrown away only on the plea that it was prompted by the police.

4. I have considered the foregoing facts and find that it is not a stage to enter into the merits of the case. It is enough to say that the present F.I.R. was supported by the complainant, the victim (abductee) and two other witnesses out of whom one is the wife of the complainant and the other is his daughter-in-law. They appeared to be natural witnesses as their presence with the abductee was highly probable being members of the same family.

5. The petitioners and the other co-accused have not appeared before the police to put up their defence on the lines given in this writ petition. On the contrary they are allegedly avoiding the investigation, which has necessitated the issuance of non-bailable warrants against them at the request of the police by the Illaqa Magistrate. In such a situation the investigation should be allowed to take its usual course.

6. Even otherwise I do not find any convincing material on record to come to a conclusion at this stage that the F.I.R. is either mala fide or it amounts to the abuse of the legal process The writ petition being meritless is dismissed with the remarks that the observation made above will have no bearing on the merits of the case, if it is sent up for trial N.H.Q./M-315/L Petition dismissed