2013 PLP 1607 (MLD)

ABDUL SAMI KHAN, J.

Through the instant petition filed under Article 199 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan 1973, the petitioner seeks quashing of F.I.R. No.221 of 2012 (hereinafter referred to as "impugned F.I.R.") dated 15-6-2012, under section 365-B, P.P.C., Police Station Fatehpur District Layyah.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioner in support of his contentions submits that prior to the registration of impugned F.I.R., another F.I.R. No. 23 of 2012 against the petitioner and co-accused for the abduction of respondent No. 2/complainant was registered on 16-1-2012 at the same police station and after registration of the F.I.R., respondent No.2/complainant herself filed Writ Petition No.1083-Q of 2012 titled "Mst. Robina Naz v. S.H.O. etc." in which, she got recorded her statement to the effect; that she has contracted marriage with Muhammad Ijaz present petitioner and that no body had abducted her. Later on, difference arose between Mst. Robina Naz and the present petitioner Muhammad Ijaz. Mst. Robina Naz left the house of the petitioner and joined her parents and got recorded the impugned F.I.R. regarding the same occurrence. Mst. Robina Naz got recorded the impugned F.I.R. under the instigation and pressure of her parents. She is legally wedded wife of the petitioner and she entered into Nikah with the petitioner according to her own freewill. The impugned F.I.R. is based on mala fide on the part of respondent No.2. Regarding the same occurrence, first F.I.R. has already been cancelled by the police and now, by twisting the facts, she has got recorded the impugned F.I.R. which is not sustainable in the eyes of law and the same is liable to be quashed.

3. On the other hand, the learned Assistant, Advocate General has opposed the contentions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and submits that the petitioner can avail remedy before the learned trial court at an appropriate stage; at this stage, it is not in the fitness of things to quash the F.I.R.

4. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as also the learned Assistant Advocate General and have perused the record brought by the police officer. It is evident from the record that prior to the registration of impugned F.I.R., F.I.R. No.23 of 2012 dated 16-1-2012 at Police Station Fatehpur under section 365-B, P.P.C. regarding the abduction of Mst. Robina Naz respondent No.2 who is also complainant of the impugned F.I.R. Mst. Robina Naz also filed Writ Petition No.1083-Q of 2012 for quashing the said F.I.R. No. 23 of 2012 in which she herself appeared in this Court and made statement that she has not been abducted by any body rather out of her own freewill, she has contracted a valid Nikah with Muhammad Ijaz and that she left the house of her parents and did not take any article from there and the F.I.R. is false. She also got recorded her statement under section 161, Cr.P.C before the investigating officer on the basis of which, F.I.R. No.23 of 2012 was cancelled. Later on, with mala fide intention and uleterior motive, as differences arose between Mst. Robina Naz and the present petitioner, she joined her parents and got recorded this false and frivolous F.I.R., impugned herein. Two F.I.Rs. of the same occurrence with same story against same accused cannot be registered.

5. For what has been discussed above, this court is of the view that allowing the impugned F.I.R. to remain in field would amount to abuse of process of law. Resultantly, this petition is allowed and the F.I.R. No.221 of 2012, dated 15-6-2012, under section 365-B, P.P.C., Police Station Fatehpur District Layyah is hereby quashed. KMZ/M-363/L Petition allowed.