Find a Lawyer

Criminal Miscellaneous No.251‑Q of 1985, decided on 25th June, 1986.

‑

‑Ss.249‑A & 561‑A‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 379/411/109‑‑Petition for quashment without moving application under S.249‑A, Cr.P.C. before Trial Court‑‑Private complaint looking to be stereotype in which vague and false allegations were levelled against petitioner‑‑Record establishing that complaint was a counterblast to suit filed by petitioner‑‑Contents of complaint showing that same was manoeuvred just to pressurise petitioner and others‑‑Process of Court, held, was not available for such type of litigation‑‑Proceedings quashed‑

‑‑S.561‑A‑‑Quashment of proceedings‑‑Private complaint looking to be stereotype and record showing that same was a counterblast to suit filed by petitioner‑‑Fact that complainant in spite of service did not turn up showed his mala fide‑‑Proceedings quashed in circumstances.

Ch. Muhammad Siddique for Petitioner.

Nemo for Respondent No.1.

Farooq Bedar, A.A.‑G. for the State.

Mst. Sakina Bibi has moved this petition under section 561‑A, Cr.P.C. She prays for quashment of proceedings in a complaint filed against her and others under section 379/411/109, P.P.C. now pending in the Court of Ilaqa Magistrate Tandlianwala Mandi. The case of the petitioner is that four years ago she was married to Abdul Majid real brother of respondent No.1. For some time the spouses lived amicably. Later on the husband of the petitioner treated her with cruelty. Many a time she was beaten and turned out of the house. As the spouses could not pull on well, the petitioner filed a suit for dissolution of marriage in the Court of Judge Family Court, Lahore. Respondent No.1, brother‑in‑law of the petitioner, as a counterblast, filed the complaint, proceedings of which are sought to be quashed by the petitioner.

Ilaqa Magistrate Tandlianwala, after recording preliminary evidence took cognizance and issued bailable warrants against all the accused in the complaint.

Learned counsel appearing in support of this petition contended that the complaint filed by the respondent is false and has been filed simply to pressurise the petitioner and to falsely implicate her other relatives. He submitted that it is a clear case of abuse of process of Court.

Respondent No.1 was duly served but in spite of that he did not turn up.

I heard the A.A.‑G.

Record sent for has been duly received. I have gone through', the complaint. It is stereotype complaint in which vague and false allegations are levelled against the petitioner for instance that she took away gold ornaments and other household articles and disappeared.

I think the counsel for the petitioner is quite justified in moving this petition directly in this Court because it is established from the record that the complaint is counterblast to the suit for dissolution o marriage. The process, of Court is not available for such type o litigation.

In the complaint it is mentioned in a very casual way that respondent No.1 approached the police but they did not listen to him. I can hardly believe that. The contents of the complaint show that it was manoeuvred just to the petitioner and others.

It is on account of this reason that I do not think it proper to direct the petitioner to first move the Magistrate under section 249, Cr.P.C.

The fact that respondent in spite of service did not turn up prima facie shows his mala fide and that the sole purpose of filing the complaint was to drag the petitioner and her relatives into frivolous litigation.

I am not prepared to allow such proceedings to continue. This petition is accordingly accepted. Proceedings are quashed against the petitioner and other accused in the complaint filed in the Court o Ilaqa Magistrate, Tandlianwala Mandi.

H.A.K. Proceedings 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.