2008 PLP 264 (MLD)
MUHAMMAD ALI — Petitioner Versus S.H.O. and others — Respondents
| Citation | 2008 PLP 264 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD 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 2008 PLP 264 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2008 PLP 264 (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 264 (MLD) (MUHAMMAD 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
- Naseem Ullah Khan Niazi for Petitioner.
- Syed Faiz-ul-Hassan for Respondent No.1.
Headnotes / Summary
Art.199
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 491
Constitutional jurisdiction of High Court
Scope
Proceedings under Art.199 of the Constitution read with S. 491, Cr.P.C., being of summary nature, High Court cannot enter into recording of evidence in constitutional jurisdiction nor it can enter into a detailed inquiry or recording of evidence, while exercising its constitutional jurisdiction
Parties could resort to concerned courts under relevant provisions of law.
Judgment & Decree
SYED SHABBAR RAZA RIZVI, J.
Mst. Fazeelat has been recovered and she states that she does not recognize petitioner her husband. She further states that she was forcibly taken away to Chiniot by petitioner, where her thumb-impressions were obtained on blank papers. She also states that she wants to go with her parents.
2. Proceedings under Article 199 of the Constitution to be read with section 491, Cr.P.C. are of summary nature, therefore, this Court cannot enter into recording of evidence in constitutional jurisdiction.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner requests that Mst. Fazeelat be asked to have a meeting with petitioner Muhammad Ali for the minutes. This was suggested to Mst. Fazeelat but she refused to have a meeting with petitioner. The learned counsel for the petitioner also insisted that she is a wedded wife of the petitioner, therefore, she may be asked to have a meeting.
4. As recorded above, this Court cannot enter into a detailed inquiry or recording of evidence in such matter while exercising its constitutional jurisdiction to be read with section 491, Cr.P.C. Therefore, parties may resort to concerned Courts under relevant provisions of law.
5. In view of the statement of Mst. Fazeelat, this writ petition is disposed of with the above observations. H.B.T./M-582/L Order accordingly.