| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2018 SLG 708 2018 SLD 708 2018 SCMR 791 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Petition No. 100 of 2017, decision Date : 15-03-2018, hearing Date : 15-02-2018. On appeal against the judgment Dated 19.01.2017 passed by the Lahore High Court, Lahore in Criminal Revision No. 71 of 2017
EJAZ AFZAL KHAN, JUSTICE, MAQBOOL BAQAR, JUSTICE, FAISAL ARAB, JUSTICE
Ahmed Raza Gillani, Additional P.G. for the State.
Criminal Petition No. 100 of 2017, decision Date : 15-03-2018, hearing Date : 15-02-2018. On appeal against the judgment Dated 19.01.2017 passed by the Lahore High Court, Lahore in Criminal Revision No. 71 of 2017
EJAZ AFZAL KHAN, JUSTICE, MAQBOOL BAQAR, JUSTICE, FAISAL ARAB, JUSTICE
Ahmed Raza Gillani, Additional P.G. for the State.
AYESHA BIBI
VS
ADDITIONAL DISTRICT JUDGE, LAHORE AND OTHERS
Law:
Section:
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----Ss. 250 & 265-K---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 499 & 500---Defamation and malicious prosecution---Scope---Action for defamation on account of initiating criminal proceedings---Immunity, rule of---Scope and purpose---Petitioner initiated two criminal cases against the respondent with the allegation that he violated her modesty, assaulted her and tried to snatch her gold ornaments---Respondent filed a private complaint against the petitioner under S. 500, P.P.C. seeking the petitioner's conviction for defaming him on account of initiation of said two cases; held, that S. 499, P.P.C. allowed a person to bring a separate case against a person who intentionally made a defamatory statement to harm ones reputation, however, where a person was sued for defamation on account of giving a statement to the police on the basis of which a criminal investigation commenced or was given during the course of a criminal investigation, the claim for defamation would certainly undermine the rule of immunity which was devised as a public policy consideration for proper administration of justice and thus the claim of defamation had to be struck down as being abuse of the process of the court---Rule of immunity was attracted irrespective of the fact whether criminal action succeeded or not---However, at the end of the trial if the acquitted person demonstrated that the criminal action was tainted with malice i.e. the law was set in motion maliciously without a reasonable cause i.e. whatever the complainant had stated in the criminal proceedings was based on fabrication of evidence or a statement was attributed to someone which was not said or written by him then he could be sued for malicious prosecution, scope of which fell within the confines of S. 250, Cr.P.C., but nothing more as said section only dealt with frivolous or vexatious accusations made in the course of proceedings and not with an allegation of defamation---Section 250, Cr.P.C. thus could only be invoked when a case had been proved to be false on evidence---Said section could not be invoked in consideration of the fact that intention to lodge the criminal case was to…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492