2003 PLP 1339 (SCMR)
MUHAMMAD BASHIR — Appellant Versus MUHAMMAD USMAN and others — Respondents
| Citation | 2003 PLP 1339 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Syed Deedar Hussain Shah and Tanvir Ahmad Khan, JJ |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD BASHIR — Appellant Versus MUHAMMAD USMAN and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2003 PLP 1339 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2003 PLP 1339 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Syed Deedar Hussain Shah and Tanvir Ahmad Khan, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2003 PLP 1339 (SCMR) (MUHAMMAD BASHIR — Appellant Versus MUHAMMAD USMAN and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Muhammad Hussain Awan, Advocate Supreme Court and C.M. Lateef, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 24th July, 2001.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment/order of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, dated 14-2-2001, passed in I. C. A. No. 1 of 2001).
Ss.10 & 11
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.1.85(3)
Accused was charged under Ss.10 & 11 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979
Quashing of- F.I.R.
Plea of Nikah-- Alleged abductee was sui juris girl who appeared before High Court and admitted contracting, marriage with the accused of her own free will-- Police during investigation had found the accused innocent-Effect-- High Court had rightly quashed the F.I.R.
Order passed by High Court was well-reasoned and based on settled principles of law
Leave to appeal was refused.
Judgment & Decree
SYED DEEDAR HUSSAIN SHAH, J.
Leave is sought against the order of the Lahore High Court Lahore, dated 14-2-2001, passed in I.C.A. No.1 of 2001.
2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that Criminal Case F.I.R. No. 110, dated 10-5-2000, was registered at Police Station Barki, District Lahore, under sections 10/11, Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance No.VII, 1979, on the report of Muhammad Bashir complainant. According to the complainant, his daughter Mst. Asia aged about 18/19 years was abducted by Muhammad Usman, Malik Zaheer Ahmad, respondents Nos. 1 and 4 and Mst. Hanifan Bibi. After registration of the case Mst. Asia and Muhammad Usman filed W.P. No.24107 of 2000 for quashment of the F.I.R. The learned Single Judge in Chambers keeping in view the circumstances of the case, quashed the F.I.R. vide order, dated 13-12-2000. Petitioner Muhammad Bashir assailed the aforesaid order through I.C.A. No.1 of 2001, which was dismissed by a Division Bench of the Lahore High Court, vide order dated 14-2-2001. Hence; this petition.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia, contended that the learned Single Judge in Chambers did not consider the case in its true perspective; that the learned Judges of the High Court while deciding the I.C.A. relied on the investigation which was found in favour of respondents Nos. 1 and 2.
4. We have considered the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the material placed on record minutely. Mst. Asia aged about 20 years is sui juris girl appeared before the learned Single Judge in the High Court and admitted that she had contracted marriage of her own will with Muhammad Usman. During investigation the police A found both the accused to be innocent. After considering all the facts the learned Single Judge rightly quashed the F.I.R. in question and his order was upheld by the learned Division Bench of the High Court. The impugned order is well reasoned and based on the settled principles of law.
5. For the foregoing reasons, we see no merit and substance in this petition, which is hereby dismissed and leave declined. M.H./M-539/S Petition dismissed