SCMR 1993

1993 PLP 1633 (SCMR)

Mst. MERAJ BIBI‑‑‑Petitioner Versus S.H.O., P.S. BAGHBANPURA and 4 others‑‑‑Respondents

Jurisdiction / Court
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Decided Date
Criminal Petition for Leave to Appeal No. 161‑L 1993, decided on 16th June, 1993.
Honorable Judges
Shafiur Rahman, Muhammad Afzal Lone, and
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 1993 PLP 1633 (SCMR)
Forum / Court Supreme Court of Pakistan
Bench Members Shafiur Rahman, Muhammad Afzal Lone, and
Parties Mst. MERAJ BIBI‑‑‑Petitioner Versus S.H.O., P.S. BAGHBANPURA and 4 others‑‑‑Respondents
Primary Law Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1993 PLP 1633 (SCMR)?

This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1993 PLP 1633 (SCMR)?

The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Shafiur Rahman, Muhammad Afzal Lone, and.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 1993 PLP 1633 (SCMR) (Mst. MERAJ BIBI‑‑‑Petitioner Versus S.H.O., P.S. BAGHBANPURA and 4 others‑‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑

Representation

  • Syed Shahid Hussain Kadri, Advocate instructed by Muhammad Aslam Chaudhry, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
  • Tanvir Ahmad, Advocate‑on‑Record with Bashir Ahmad Shahzad for Respondents Nos.3 and 4.
  • Date of hearing: 16th June, 1993.
  • ************(By Mr. Kadri, Advocate):

Headnotes / Summary

(On appeal from the order dated 27‑3‑1993 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore passed in Cr. Misc No.201/H of 1993). ‑‑‑‑S. 491‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185 (3)‑‑‑Statement of the detenu was recorded in Court‑‑‑Differences between the spouses appeared to have been settled for the time being and the detenue was no longer in restraint‑‑‑No further inquiry was, therefore, called for in Supreme Court‑‑ Leave to appeal was refused accordingly.

Judgment & Decree

SHAFIUR RAHMAN, J.‑‑‑The petitioner seeks leave to appeal against order passed by the Lahore High Court dated 27‑3‑1993 in a Habeus Corpus Petition. The impugned order reads as hereunder:‑‑ "Feroze Din and Faqir Muhammad are present. Mst. Surraya, detenu is daughter of Feroze Din. It is stated by Feroze Din that Mst. Surraya is living happily with her husband Muhammad Boota. It is also stated by Feroze Din and his son Faqir Muhammad that Mst. Meraj Bibi, petitioner is not at all related to Mst. Surraya. In view of the statements of father and brother of the detenu, there is no substance in this petition, which is dismissed with costs of Rs.1,000." This order was passed on a Miscellaneous petition. Earlier to it, the Court had passed the following order disposing of the main petition: "Feroze Din, father of the detenu Mst. Surraya is present. He states that Mst. Surraya is living with her real brother Faqir Muhammad and that she is not being detained by any body. This being so, there is no substance in the petition, which is, accordingly, dismissed." We called for the detenu Mst. Surraya in Court. She was examined on oath. Her statement was recorded and has been placed on the file. It appears that the differences between the spouses have been settled for the time being, that Mst. Surraya is no longer in restraint. Hence, no further inquiry is called for in this Court. Leave to appeal is, therefore, refused leaving the parties to seek their own respective alternate reliefs in Courts having jurisdiction in the matter if they want to pursue it further. Cr. P. 161/L/93. Statement of Surraya wife of Boota, permanently resident of Tundey Guru, Post Office Ajnianwala, Tchsil and District Sheikhupura, presently resideing in House No. 6, Street No. 26, Sher Shah Colony, Karachi‑28 c/o Mr. Abdul Sattar, on solemn affirmation. I am married to Boota and have four children from him. I am living with Boota my husband. There is no restraint on me in the matter of living with my husband. I have come from Karachi. For the last three/four months I have been living in Karachi. ************(By Mr. Kadri, Advocate): It is incorrect that I had obtained divorce from Boota and a litigation was going on. The petitioner Mst. Meraj Bibi is not related to me. I have not been living with her. I was taken forcibly by the petitioner at one stage. I was not willingly living with her. The litigation against my husband was carried on my behalf by the petitioner. I was not a willing party to it. N.H.Q./M‑1774 Leave to appeal refused.