Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860

Section: 124-A, 147, 149,153, 153-A & 341

Law: Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), 1898

Section:

1. Penal Code (XLV of 1860)---

 Ss. 124-A, 147, 149,153, 153-A & 341---Balochistan Regulation and Control of Loudspeakers and Sound Amplifiers Ordinance (II of 1965), Ss. 3 & 4---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 196---Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 199---Hateful speeches, order violation, promulgating, and promoting feelings of hatred amongst different racial regional groups and communities---Constitutional petition---First Information Report, quashing of---Petitioners were workers of a political party (Pashtoon Tahaffuz Movement /P.T.M.), against whom the allegation was that they gathered at road near a Masjid and delivered speeches against the Government, Pakistani Forces, Security Agencies and wanted to provoke the people---Petitioners sought quashing of FIR registered against them on the ground that cognizance for said offences could only be taken upon a complaint filed by the Authority of a Federal or Provincial Government or some other Officer empowered in said behalf--Validity---Record reflected that the police registered a criminal case against the petitioners and others , with the allegation of hateful speeches etc. , whereas for the prosecution for such offences against the State, no Court could take cognizance of the same, unless upon a complaint made by order of, or with the authority from the Federal or Provincial Government concerned under the process governed by S. 196 of the Cr.P.C.---This had not been done in the present case; thus, no Court could initiate the process against the accused , because (in the present case) FIR was registered by the Duty Officer/Sub Inspector of the concerned Police Station on his own and competent authority under the law had not initiated said process---Such FIR can be assailed in constitutional jurisdiction of the High Court to prevent abuse of process of any Court to secure the ends of Justice---In the present case, the process of the law had been abused with mala fide intention to scandalize and create harassment for the petitioners and disrepute them in the society, which needed interference by the High Court---Constitutional petition filed by the accused persons was allowed, and the FIR registered against them and proceedings were quashed, in circumstances.

1. Constitution of Pakistan---

----Arts. 15, 17 & 19---Political Party operating against integrity of Pakistan--Reference to the Supreme Court---Scope---Right to freedom of assembly, association, expression and speech, provided and protected under Arts. 16, 17 & 19 of the Constitution, are subject to any reasonable restrictions imposed by law in the interest of public order, the sovereignty or integrity of Pakistan, public order, or morality etc.---Every citizen, not being in the service of Pakistan, shall have the right to form or be a member of political party, subject to any reasonable restrictions imposed by law in the interest of the sovereignty or integrity of Pakistan---Where the Federal Government declares that any political party has been formed or is operating in a manner prejudicial to the sovereignty or integrity of Pakistan, it shall within fifteen days of such declaration, refer the matter to the Supreme Court whose decision on such reference shall be final.

1. Penal Code (XLV of 1860)---

----Ss.124-A, 147, 149, 153, 153-A & 341---Balochistan Regulation and Control of Loudspeakers and Sound Amplifiers Ordinance (II of 1965), Ss. 3 & 4--Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 199---Constitutional petition---First Information Report, quashing of---Petitioners were workers of political party (Pashtoon Tahaffuz Movement /P.T.M.), against whom FIR was registered by the Police with the allegation that they gathered at road near a Masjid and delivered speeches against the Government, Pakistani Forces, Security Agencies and wanted to provoke the people---Petitioners sought quashing FIR registered against them on the ground that cognizance for said offences could only be taken upon a complaint filed by the Authority of a Federal or Provincial Government or some other Officer empowered in said behalf---Validity---No doubt, the inherent power (of High Court) should be rarely and sparingly invoked only in the interest of justice to redress grievances for which, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, no other procedure or remedy is available---It is an extraordinary jurisdiction that can not override provisions of the Court, but issues may arise where demands of justice require immediate, honest, and substantial justice---In such circumstances the Courts would be justified to exercise their jurisdiction to save a party from harassment and abuse of the process of Court---Such power may be used sparingly, but it confers broad powers on the Court to meet such eventualities and pass any order which ends of justice may require---Present case fell within the said parameters--Allegations contained in the FIR were general; there was no specific role attributed to the petitioners and no offence, thus, had been made nor could be proved against them---High Court declared that the process of the law had been abused with mala fide intention to scandalize and create harassment for the petitioners and disrepute them in the society, which needed interference---Constitutional petition filed by the accused persons was allowed, and the FIR registered against them and proceedings were quashed, in circumstances.