Find a Lawyer

Constitutional Petition No. 527 of 1975, decided on 3rd February, 1983.

-S. 561-A-Muslim Family Laws Ordinance (VIII of 1961), S. 6 "Union Council" and Chairman Union Council," two different entities-Union Council competent to file complaint under S. 6, Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1961-Complaint filed by "Chairman" of Union Council, quashed.

Muhammad Islam v. The State P L D 1967 Pesh. 201; Muhammad

Shafi v. The Chairman, Union Committee Lahore and 2 others 1972 P Cr. L J 73 and Fateh Muhammad v. Chairman Union Com mittee Ward No. 14/15 Lahore and 2 others P L D 1975 Lab. 951 rel.

Noor Muhammad for Petitioner.

Nooruddin Sarki for Respondents.

Date of hearing: 3rd February, 1983.

.-In this petition the petitioner has sought the quashment of a complaint under section 6 of the Muslim Family Laws Ordinance of 1961 filed ,.by the Chairman, Union Committee P. E. C. H. S., Karachi for committing offence under the above provisions of the Ordinance. From the complaint it seems that it has been filed by the Chairman instead of Union Council. This point has been subject-matter of the pronouncement by the superior Courts. Reference may be made to the case of Muhammad Islam v. The State (P L D 1967 Pesh. 201), the case of Muhammad Shafi v. The Chairman Union Committee, Lahore and 2 others (1972 P Cr. L J 73) and the case 'of Fateh Muhammad v. Chairman Union Committee Ward No. 14/15 Lahore and 2 others (P L D 1975 Lah. 951) and also the observations of a Division Bench of the erstwhile High Court of Sind and Baluchistan order dated 25th September, 1974 passed in Con stitution Petition No. 1185 of 1974 filed by the present petitioner, which was dismissed on the ground of being premature, The relevant observations read as follows: -

"Under the Ordinance and the rules framed thereunder an offence of ant this kind can be tried only upon a complaint made by the Union Council. Learned counsel argues and we entirely agrees that the Union Council and the Chairman are two different entities and that a complaint filed by the Chairman is not sufficient to enable a Magistrate to take organizance. He has relied upon a decision in P L. D 1967 Pesh. 201 with which we are in entire agreement."

In the above cited cases also it was held that the Union Council is competent to file a complaint. In this view of the matter, we accepted the petition and quash the complaint with no orders as to cost.

M' Y. M. Complainant quashed.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.