1992 P Cr (PLP)

‑‑‑‑S. 561‑A‑‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.419, 420, 468 & 471‑‑‑Quashing of proceedings‑‑‑Allegation levelled against accused in F.I.R. not only was found true during investigation by police, but also was substantiated with evidence produced before the Magistrate who had held inquiry‑‑‑Accused was facing trial in a case which had been reported against him by father of girl to whom accused was married and it was not possible to hold that his father‑in‑law would have levelled baseless allegation against him‑‑‑Neither case was made out for observing that it was a case of no evidence nor it appeared to be a case for exercise of extraordinary powers under 5.561‑A, Cr.P.C: Petition for quashing of proceedings was dismissed in circumstances. Pir SA. Rashid for Petitioner Quashment of the proceedings,,, in the case under sections 419/420/468/471, P.P.C. pending in the Court of the Magistrate has been sought through this petition by the petitioner.

2. It is contended on his behalf that he has been involved in this case maliciously at the instance of the father of his wife whom he had divorced on 28‑7‑1990 but the I had not attained finality as he had not pronounced According to counsel, the petitioner had withheld pronouncement of as the father of his wife had yet not fulfilled certain commitments, which were agreed to. The learned counsel contended that as the petitioner refused to pronounce the father of his wife, a year after Talaq, involved him in this case.

3. On merits, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there is no evidence with the prosecution to prove that the petitioner ever worked or posed as an M.B., B.S. doctor.

4. The case being sought to be quashed was registered on the application submitted by one Fazal Hussain in which he alleged that mother of petitioner approached him and asked for the hand of his daughter Mst. Iram Mazhar stating that his son (petitioner) was M.B., B.S. doctor and had qualified FCPS(1) also. He further stated in the F.I.R. that he married his daughter to the petitioner who was M.Sc. First,, Class believing that the petitioner was an M.B., B.S. doctor. Further alleged that later he came to know that fraud had been committed with him and that actually the petitioner was only F: Sc. and was not a doctor. He had also submitted an application to the Deputy Commissioner, Lahore upon which Mr. Ahmad Ali Khan, M.I.C. was deputed to hold an inquiry. The said M.I.C. after recording the evidence, had reported that the petitioner had committed the fraud.

5. The allegation levelled against the petitioner in the F.I.R. was not only found true during investigation by the police but was also substantiated with the evidence produced before the Magistrate who had held inquiry under the order of the Deputy Commissioner. The petitioner is facing trial in a case which has been reported against him by the father of the girl with whom the A petitioner was married. It is not possible at this stage to hold that the father would have levelled baseless allegations. No case is made out for observing that it was a case of no evidence, nor a case has been made out for exercise of extraordinary powers under section 561‑A, Cr.P.C. The petition is dismissed being without merit. H.B.T./A‑181/L Petition dismissed.