| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2023 SLG 2019 2023 SLD 2019 = 2023 PLD 89 |
Write Petition No. 984 of 2020, decided on 10th February, 2023.
Before Syed Shahid Bahar, J
Ch. Shoukat Aziz for Petitioners. Raja Saeed Khan, A.A.G for the State. Raja Ayaz Ahmed for
Respondent No.5. Shahid Ali Awan for
Respondent No.6.
ZUBAIR and 16 others---Petitioners
VERSUS
SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT POLICE, JHELUM VALLEY and others--Respondents
Law: Azad Jammu and Kashmir Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Act, 1985
Section: 11 , 16 , 19 , 561
Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
Section: 154
(a) Azad Jammu and Kashmir Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Act (V of 1985)---
----Ss. 11, 16 & 19---Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution Act (VIII of 1974), Art. 44---Writ petition---Quashing of FIR---Scope---Accused persons sought quashing of FIR registered against them under Ss. 11, 16 & 19 of the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Act, 1985 ---Main accused had not stated a single word about his marital ties with the victim and had simply alleged that he had been falsely implicated in the criminal case while at arguments stage, he had taken an abrupt U-turn and had come forward with the stance that he was husband of victim (who was stated to be pregnant) and also claimed to be father of a daughter aged 02 years from the wedlock---Nikah of victim with one of the respondents was an admitted fact while rest of the subsequent story was shrouded in mystery which required detailed evidence, probe and investigation which was not a job of the High Court---Investigation agency was allowed to probe into the matter in order to dig out the veracity of allegation, however, the accused persons could exhaust multiple statutory remedies available to them---Writ petition was dismissed.
(b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)---
----S.154---Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Constitution Act (VIII of 1974), Art. 44---Writ petition---Quashing of FIR---Scope---It is not a rule to decline interference in a extraordinary jurisdiction by shutting the door of Court qua quashing of an FIR in a mathematical manner, but it varies from case to case, and if facts of the case demand and extraordinary circumstances are oozing from the record High Court can move ahead to rescue the person from such a situation.
Miraj Khan v. Gul Ahmed and 3 others 2000 SCMR 122; Mst. Parveen Akhtar v. Muhammad Yousaf Zahid and another 2002 PCr.LJ 1593; Mst. Shamim v. DPO District Khanewal and 2 others 2004 P.Cr.LJ 606; Ghulam Qadir Faraz alias Babar v. S.H.O. P.S. Saddar Kamoke and 2 others 2012 PCr.LJ 638 and Mumtaz Hussain