2004 P Cr (PLP)
INAYAT HUSSAIN — Petitioner Versus S.H.O. POLICE STATION UMAR KOT, DISTRICT RAJANPUR and others — Respondents
| Citation | 2004 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | INAYAT HUSSAIN — Petitioner Versus S.H.O. POLICE STATION UMAR KOT, DISTRICT RAJANPUR and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2004 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2004 P Cr (PLP)?
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: 2004 P Cr (PLP) (INAYAT HUSSAIN — Petitioner Versus S.H.O. POLICE STATION UMAR KOT, DISTRICT RAJANPUR and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Sardar Abid Khan Jatoi for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
Art. 199
Constitutional petition
Quashing of Sessions Court's order
Petitioner had challenged the order of the Sessions Court whereby the application brought by him under S.491, Cr.P.C. for the recovery of his daughter-in-law had been dismissed with the observation that the same had been filed simply to hamper the proceedings in the criminal case got registered in respect of the abduction of the said girl-- Alleged detenue admittedly was presently living with her father and uncle who had got registered a case against the petitioner's son etc. under S. 11 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979
Girl was not shown to be in illegal and improper custody of the said respondents--Petition was dismissed in limine in circumstances.
Judgment & Decree
Inayat Hussain, the petitioner has brought the instant petition for setting aside the order, dated 14-4-2003 recorded by learned Sessions Judge, Rajanpur, whereby he has dismissed his application under section 491, Cr.P.C. for recovery of the alleged detenue Nazira Bibi and setting her at liberty after recording her statement.
2. Briefly the facts relevant for the disposal of this petition are that the petitioner had brought the aforesaid application under section 491, Cr.P.C. before the Court of learned Sessions Judge, Rajanpur for the recovery of said Mst. Nazira Bibi mentioning therein that she had entered into Nikah with his son Muhammad Yar on 17-4-2002 while her parents on 6-10-2002 had got registered a false case in respect of her abduction against him and others. On 2-3-2003, the local police had conducted raid and in the same arrested his said son and daughter-in-law. They kept his son in the judicial lock-up and handed over his daughter -in-law to her parents while there is danger to her life at their hands. He prayed for her recovery and recording her statement and then proceed further in the matter in accordance with law.
3. The learned Sessions Judge, vide his order, dated 14-4-2003 had dismissed his said application observing that it was simply to hamper the proceedings in the said criminal case.
4. His learned counsel has submitted that respondents Nos.2 to 4 illegally and improperly had detained the petitioner's daughter-in-law Mst. Nazira Bibi and hence she may be got recovered and produced before this Court and set at liberty after recording her statement.
5. I have carefully considered his submission and gone through the copies of record annexed to the petition.
6. Admittedly Mst. Nazira Bibi, the alleged detenue is presently living with respondents Nos.2 and 3, who are her uncle and father respectively, while respondent No.2 admittedly had got registered the B case F. I. R. No. 149, dated 6-10-2002 under section 11 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance No.VII of 1979 with Police Station Umar Kot against petitioner's said son and others regarding her abduction.
7. In these circumstances, I have not been persuaded that she is in custody of respondents Nos.2 and 3 illegally and improperly. The petition, therefore, is dismissed in limine. N.H.Q./I-213/L Petition dismissed.