PCRLJ 1995

1995 P Cr (PLP)

Mst. GHULAM FATIMA — Petitioner Versus S.H.O. etc. — Respondents

Jurisdiction / Court
Lahore
Decided Date
Criminal Original No.315/W of 1993, decided on 19th May 1993.
Honorable Judges
Muhammad Arif, J
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 1995 P Cr (PLP)
Forum / Court Lahore
Bench Members Muhammad Arif, J
Parties Mst. GHULAM FATIMA — Petitioner Versus S.H.O. etc. — Respondents
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1995 P Cr (PLP)?

This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1995 P Cr (PLP)?

The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Muhammad Arif, J.

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

Cite this legal precedent as: 1995 P Cr (PLP) (Mst. GHULAM FATIMA — Petitioner Versus S.H.O. etc. — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Representation

  • Gulraiz Aftab for Petitioner.

Headnotes / Summary

Constitution of Pakistan (1973) Art. 204

Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.364

Contempt of Court-- Grievance of the petitioner was that order passed by High Court in her Constitutional petition directing the Superintendent of Police to take an appropriate action on her complaint according to law had not been complied with

Investigation on the F.I.R. got registered by the petitioner was in progress and the respondent police officials did not appear to have violated the High Court's order in any manner whatsoever

Petition was dismissed in limine accordingly.

Judgment & Decree

Criminal Original No.315/W of 1993, decided on 19th May 1993. Constitution of Pakistan (1973) Art. 204

Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.364

Contempt of Court-- Grievance of the petitioner was that order passed by High Court in her Constitutional petition directing the Superintendent of Police to take an appropriate action on her complaint according to law had not been complied with

Investigation on the F.I.R. got registered by the petitioner was in progress and the respondent police officials did not appear to have violated the High Court's order in any manner whatsoever

Petition was dismissed in limine accordingly. Gulraiz Aftab for Petitioner. The grievance of the petitioner is that order, dated 21-2-1992 passed in her Constitutional petition bearing Writ Petition No.8744 of 1992, directing the Superintendent of Police, Sheikhupura to take an appropriate action on the complaint of the petitioner according to law', has not been complied with and therefore, the respondent Police Officials have exposed themselves to the wrath of law of contempt of Court. A perusal of the material placed on the record indicates that a criminal case under section 364, P.P.C. was registered at Police Station City A-Division Sheikhupura vide F.I.R. No. 511, dated 10-12-1992 on a written complaint of Mst. Ghulam Fatima petitioner herself. This application was submitted by her within about two months of the order, dated 21-2-1992 and was sent to S.H.O., Police Station City A-Division, Sheikhupura, by the then Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sheikhupura. The learned counsel has argued that the local police has taken into custody Messrs Muhammad Siddique, Inayat Bibi and Akbar although the accused named by the petitioner in her complaints before this Court as also before the higher police officials was her son-in-law, namely, Muhammad Idrees, and that the alleged application was not sent by her but by the said Muhammad Idrees who, in fact, forged the thumb-impression of the petitioner thereon. He was, however, not in a position to make a reference to any material brought on the file by Mst. Ghulam Fatima in support of her contentions being raised today and is not even aware of the stage of investigation. If the petitioner had any grouse to make about the genuineness or otherwise of the drawing up of F.I.R. No.511, dated 10-12-1992, she would have done so after obtaining information in that behalf. The arrest of Messrs Muhammad Siddique, Inayat Bibi and Akbar has not been objected to by the in this Criminal Original. In fact the information in that regard was passed on to the learned counsel by her in Court. The investigation of case F.I.R. No.511, dated 10-12-1992 is in progress and I am not inclined to the view that the respondent police officials have violated this Court's order, dated 21-9-1992, in any measure whatsoever. This application is sans merit and is liable to be dismissed in limine. So be it. N.H.Q./G-243/L Petition dismissed.