2026 P Cr (PLP)
Muhammad Baber — Petitioner Versus Ex-Officio Justice of Peace and others — Respondents
| Citation | 2026 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | Muhammad Baber — Petitioner Versus Ex-Officio Justice of Peace and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2026 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 2026 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: 2026 P Cr (PLP) (Muhammad Baber — Petitioner Versus Ex-Officio Justice of Peace and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Barrister Haris Azmat, Barrister Hasnain Ali Khan, Barrister Aneeq and Ali Khizar for Petitioner.
- Ali Haider and Zain Ali for Respondent No. 3.
Headnotes / Summary
Ss. 22-A & 22-B
Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 199
Registration of second criminal case
Petitioner was a renowned cricketer of international fame and was aggrieved of order passed by Ex-officio Justice of Peace directing police authorities to register criminal case against him on the allegation of extending life threats to respondent / complainant
Proceedings were initiated by respondent / complainant after High Court had suspended earlier order to register criminal case
Held: Conduct of respondent / complainant demonstrated her relentless attempt to bring petitioner within the fold of criminal proceedings by all possible means
Such conduct of respondent / complainant cast serious doubts upon bona fides of accusation as criminal process was employed not only for vindication of justice but to somehow entangle the petitioner
High Court set aside order passed by Ex-officio Justice of Peace as the earlier order had also been set aside
Constitutional petition was allowed accordingly.
Judgment & Decree
Asjad Javaid Ghural, J.
Through this petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, petitioner Muhammad Baber has challenged the legality and propriety of order dated 17.03.2021 passed by the Ex-Officio Justice of Peace, Lahore, whereby upon application of respondent No.3 (respondent) under Section 22-A Cr.P.C. a direction for registration of criminal case against him was issued.
2. Heard. It is straightaway observed that prior to filing of application seeking registration of case, the respondent filed another application for similar relief, which was allowed by the learned Ex Officio Justice of Peace vide order dated 14.01.2021. The said order was challenged by the petitioner before this Court by way of filing Writ Petition No.2606/21, in which order of the learned Ex Officio Justice of Peace was suspended vide order dated 15.01.2021. The respondent instead of awaiting the outcome of the said writ petition, hastened to file yet another application with the allegation that she received life threats from unknown mobile numbers and she was being blackmailed and also mentioned certain mobile numbers in said application. She claimed to have intimacy with the petitioner but did not mention his name despite allegedly receiving threats from his mobile number, which appears to be a calculated move on her part to defeat the order of this Court for suspension of order qua registration of case against the petitioner. It further reflects eagerness of the respondent to somehow implicate the petitioner in a criminal case and unfortunately the learned Ex Officio Justice of Peace has failed to take into consideration this aspect of the matter and proceeded to pass the impugned order in a summarily manner. The conduct of the respondent demonstrates her relentless attempt to bring the petitioner within the fold of criminal proceedings by all possible means, which casts serious doubts upon the bona fides of the accusation and suggest the criminal process is being employed not for the vindication of justice but to somehow entangle the petitioner. Main application of the respondent seeking registration of case has been rejected by this Court vide order of even date passed in W.P.No.2606/2021, therefore, instant application being offshoot of the said application also deserve similar treatment. Resultantly, instant application is allowed and impugned order of Ex Officio Justice of Peace dated 17.03.2021 is set-aside. MH/M-60/L Petition allowed.