YLR 2010

2010 PLP 781 (YLR)

Mst. TABASSAM PERVEEN — Petitioner Versus D.C.O. and others — Respondents

Jurisdiction / Court
Lahore
Decided Date
Writ Petition No.2804 of 2009, decided on 10th June, 2009.
Honorable Judges
Syed Zulfiqar Ali Bokhari, J
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2010 PLP 781 (YLR)
Forum / Court Lahore
Bench Members Syed Zulfiqar Ali Bokhari, J
Parties Mst. TABASSAM PERVEEN — Petitioner Versus D.C.O. and others — Respondents
Primary Law (b) Constitution of Pakistan (1973), (a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2010 PLP 781 (YLR)?

This judgment primarily cites: (b) Constitution of Pakistan (1973), (a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2010 PLP 781 (YLR)?

The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Syed Zulfiqar Ali Bokhari, J.

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

Cite this legal precedent as: 2010 PLP 781 (YLR) (Mst. TABASSAM PERVEEN — Petitioner Versus D.C.O. and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

(b) Constitution of Pakistan (1973) (a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Representation

  • Tanveer Ahmad Hashmi and Sardar Tariq Sher Khan for Petitioner.
  • Mubasher Latif Gill, A.A.-G. with Muhammad Khurram Khan, D.C.O., Lodhran and Azaz Khan, E.D.O. (Education) for Respondents.

Headnotes / Summary

S. 561-A

Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.379/506/186

Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.199

Constitutional petition

Theft and criminal intimidation

Quashing of F.I.R.

False implication of the petitioner on the basis of mala fide of the complainant could not be ruled out

Petitioner being a lady working in Grade-19, continuation of trial in such cases would not serve any purpose, when the contents of F.I.R. did not disclose commission of any serious offences

No chance of conviction of the petitioner existed in the said case

Continuation of trial of the petitioner would increase agony of the petitioner without any result was quashed, in circumstances.

Arts. 199 & 212

Constitutional petition

Prayer for direction to Authority (Employer Department) to receive joining report of employee

Petitioner who sought quashing of F.I.R. registered against her was a lady working in grade-19

Said lady in her petition under Art.199 of the Constitution had prayed that employer department be directed to receive her joining report

Grievance of the petitioner raised in the petition, related to the terms and conditions of service

High Court had no jurisdiction to entertain same keeping in view the bar contained under Art.212 of the Constitution

Petitioner could approach competent forum for redressal of her grievances. Sardar Ashiq Hussain Balouch for the Complainant.

Judgment & Decree

SYED ZULFIQAR ALI BOKHARI, J.--Through this Constitutional petition the petitioner has made following prayers: "(i) DCO, Lodhran may be directed to receive the joining report of the petitioner with reference to order dated 2-4-2009 as EDO (Education). (ii) The impugned F.I.R. No.165/2009 dated 3-4-2009 under sections 186/ 506/379, P.P.C. registered at Police Station City Lodhran, District Lodhran may kindly be declared null and void having no legal effects. (iii) Respondent No.1 may be directed not to harass the petitioner. (iv) The order dated 13-4-2009 passed by DCO, respondent No. 1 may kindly be set aside declared being illegal and having no legal effects. (v) Any other relief which this Honourable Court may deem fit may also be awarded. First I will take up prayer No.2 which is regarding quashment of case F.I.R. No.165/2009, dated 3-4-2009.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that in compliance with the order dated 1-4-2009 of Government of the Punjab, the Secretary Education passed another order dated 2-4-2009 and the petitioner in compliance with the order dated 2-4-2009 approached the respondents to join his previous place of posting. The petitioner approached DCO, Lodhran first and then she went to the Office of Executive District Officer (Education), Lodhran where she tried to give her joining but the diary and dispatch Clerk made hurdle and refused to give her register and mis-behaved. There was exchange of hot words between the petitioner and respondent No.2 who with the help of respondent No.1 got registered above said criminal case with mala fide intention. The petitioner has not committed any offence even from the contents of F.I.R. no offence is made out. Learned counsel for the petitioner prayed for quashment of F.I.R. keeping in view the whole story of the case.

3. On the other hand learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No.2 complainant submits that the petitioner has obstructed in the duty of a civil servant by snatching diary and dispatch register from Rana. Amir, Clerk of the office and on his written application, case was got registered by the respondent No.2.

4. Learned A.A.-G. submits that since challan has been submitted in the Court of competent jurisdiction. This Court cannot quash the F.I.R. The petitioner has an alternate remedy under section 249-A, Cr.P.C. which can be availed before the Trial Court.

5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

6. Keeping in view the long-standing tension and multifarious allegations levelled by the parties against each other I found that there was misconception in the mind of the petitioner who tried to get join her previous place of posting in compliance with the order dated 2-4-2009 issued by Secretary Education but the complainant obstructed and objected where there was exchange of hot words between the parties and resultantly case was registered against the petitioner. Keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case false implication of the petitioner on the basis of mala fide of the complainant cannot be ruled out. The petitioner is a lady working in grade-19. Continuation of trial in such cases shall not serve any purpose when the contents of F.I.R. do not disclose commission of some serious offences. There is no chance of conviction of the petitioner in the above-said case. In the circumstances continuation of trial of the petitioner will increase agony of the petitioner without any result. So I exercising the powers under section 561-A, Cr.P.C. quash the F.I.R. NO.165, dated 3-4-2009 under sections 186/506/379, P.P.C. registered at Police Station City Lodhran, District Lodhran.

7. As regards other prayers of the petitioner mentioned above, it is held that the petitioner is a civil servant. Her grievances raised in this petition related to the terms and conditions of service. This Court has no jurisdiction to entertain the same keeping in view the bar contained under Article 212 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan. The petitioner, if so advised, may approach the competent forum for redressal of her grievances. This writ petition is disposed of accordingly. H.B.T./T-4/L Order accordingly.