2006 PLP 1623 (YLR)
ANWAR-UL-HAQ ANJUM — Petitioner Versus Mian ANJUM YOUSUF — Respondent
| Citation | 2006 PLP 1623 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Jawwad S. Khawaja, J |
| Parties | ANWAR-UL-HAQ ANJUM — Petitioner Versus Mian ANJUM YOUSUF — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Defamation |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2006 PLP 1623 (YLR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Defamation as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2006 PLP 1623 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Jawwad S. Khawaja, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2006 PLP 1623 (YLR) (ANWAR-UL-HAQ ANJUM — Petitioner Versus Mian ANJUM YOUSUF — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ch. Muhammad Afzal Wahla for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondent.
- Date of hearing: 25th March, 2005.
Headnotes / Summary
Petitioner, who was an accused in a criminal case, in his statement recorded under S. 342, Cr. P. C. , made certain assertions against respondent who finding said assertions defamatory, filed suit for damages on the ground that his reputation had been injured by said assertions
Trial Court dismissed suit holding that statement which was made by petitioner during course of judicial proceedings, was protected and that suit filed by respondent against petitioner was not maintainable
Appellate Court, however, reversed findings of Trial Court
Any statement or assertion made before any Court, could not give rise to an action for libel or slander
Appellate decree, in circumstances being a result of illegal exercise of jurisdiction, was not maintainable
Same was set aside, whereas dismissal of suit by Trial Court, stood restored. Mahomed Alam v. Crown PLD 1954 Sindh 70 ref.
Judgment & Decree
JAWWAD S. KHAWAJA, J.
The petitioner/defendant impugns the appellate decree, dated 16-6-2001, whereby the decree of the learned trial Court, dated 28-2-2001 was set aside and a. sum of Rs.9000 was awarded to the respondent/ plaintiff by way of damages.
2. The facts of this case are simple. The petitioner/defendant was an accused in case F.I.R. No.292/90, dated 6-8-1990 registered under sections 381, 411, 406 and 420, P.P.C. on the complaint of the respondent/plaintiff Mian Anjum Yousuf. In the said case while recording his statement under section 342, Cr.P.C., the petitioner made certain assertions against the respondent/plaintiff. It is these assertions which the respondent found defamatory and filed a suit for recovery of Rs.24,000 as damages on the ground that his reputation had been adversely affected by the aforesaid statement. The learned Trial Court dismissed the suit on 28-2-2001 holding that the statement had been made during the course of judicial proceedings and was protected. As such, it was held that no suit was maintainable.
3. The respondent/plaintiff, feeling aggrieved, filed an appeal which, as noted above, was partly allowed. Learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to the case titled Mahomed Alam v. Crown (PLD 1954 Sindh 70) to contend that the learned appellate Court has failed to recognize the well established principle of law set out in the aforesaid precedent. I have gone through the cited precedent which supports the plea of the petitioner that any statement or assertion which is made before any Court, cannot give rise to an action for libel or slander. The argument of learned counsel for the petitioner is well founded. In the circumstances, it is clear that the appellate decree is a result of illegal exercise of jurisdiction and, therefore, is not sustainable. The same is, therefore, set aside. As a consequence, the dismissal of the suit by the learned trail Court vide decree, dated 28-2-2001 stands restored. H.B.T./A-534/L?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Petition allowed.