1986 P Cr (PLP)
Mst. MUSARRAT FATIMA‑‑Petitioner Versus DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, HYDERABAD and 2 others‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 1986 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | Sajjad Ali Shah and Nasir Aslam Zahid, JJ |
| Parties | Mst. MUSARRAT FATIMA‑‑Petitioner Versus DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, HYDERABAD and 2 others‑‑Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1986 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1986 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: Sajjad Ali Shah and Nasir Aslam Zahid, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1986 P Cr (PLP) (Mst. MUSARRAT FATIMA‑‑Petitioner Versus DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, HYDERABAD and 2 others‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Syed Madad Ally Shah for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑S. 491‑‑Rule nisi‑‑Petitioner an adult and sui juris detained in Darul Aman under orders of Magistrate‑‑Petitioner not willing to slay in Darul Aman but having embraced Islam and married wanted to go back to husband‑‑Order of detention by Magistrate was quashed and rule nisi discharged in circumstances. Syed Sarfraz Ahmad, A.A.‑G. for the State.
Judgment & Decree
SAJJAD ALI SHAH, J.‑‑ This is an application under section 491, Cr.P.C. filed by Mst. Musarrat Fatima herself who is at present detained in Darul Aman against her wishes. Rule Nisi was issued by us in compliance whereof petitioner has been produced before us in the Court and we have recorded her statement. We had also sent for the record from the Court of District Magistrate, Hyderabad because it was stated before us that some orders have been passed by the learned District Magistrate in connection with her custody in Darul Aman. Record of the Court of District Magistrate shows that S.H.O. Fuleh on 22‑1‑1986 took the petitioner in custody and produced her before A. C. M., Fuleh who in turn sent her to the Court of District Magistrate for orders under section 552, Cr.P.C. which are to be passed exclusively by the District Magistrate. There is also an application i the record filed by Bashir Masih father of Mst. Musarrat Fatima in which it i5 stated that his daughter is married and her husband is residing in Punjab since about a year and further that his daughter is pregnant as such it is suspected that she has been committing Zina and a request was made that she should be medically examined and returned to him. This application is addressed to Additional City Magistrate, Fuleh. It is not a direct complaint filed in a proper way and no action has been taken on it as contemplated under section 200, Cr.P.C. and no attempt was made to send for complainant and record his statement and proceed further. Moreover, name of the accused is not given in this application. Learned A.A.‑G. present before us is unable to tell us whether any criminal case as such has been filed against the petitioner. Any way perusal of record from the Court of the District Magistrate further shows that she was produced before him and he passed a short order on 22‑1‑1986 directing Darul Aman to receive the custody of Mst. Musarrat Fatima to be kept there until further orders in the matter. No further orders have been passed and in the result petitioner continues to stay in Darul Aman against her wishes indefinitely. We have recorded her statement and we are of the view that A she is about 20 years old and as such she is adult sui juris and she has expressed her desire that she is not willing and ready to stay in Darul Aman and she has become a Muslim, and is married to Masood Ahmad which is evident from the Nikahnama produced, she wants to go back with him. In the circumstances and for the facts and reasons stated above, we quash the order passed by the District Magistrate on 22‑1‑1986 and set the petitioner at liberty. She can go wherever she likes. Rule Nisi is discharged. S. A. Application accepted.