| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2026 SLG 2184 2026 SLD 2184 = 2026 PCRLJ 477 |
Sindh High Court, Larkana Bench
Constitution Petition No. D-629 of 2025, decided on 8th August, 2025.
Presented By: Muhammad Saleem Jessar and Riazat Ali Sahar, JJ
Qazi Sajid Ali M. Qureshi along with Petitioners. Liaquat Ali Shar, Addl. Advocate General, Sindh along with S.I.P Bashir Ahmed Khokhar and Ali Anwar Kandhro, Addl. Prosecutor General, Sindh for
Respondents Nos. 1 to 5. Ghulam Muhammad Barejo for
Respondents Nos. 6 and 7. Nemo for
Respondents Nos. 8 to 12.
Constitution Petition No. D-629 of 2025, decided on 8th August, 2025.
Presented By: Muhammad Saleem Jessar and Riazat Ali Sahar, JJ
Qazi Sajid Ali M. Qureshi along with Petitioners. Liaquat Ali Shar, Addl. Advocate General, Sindh along with S.I.P Bashir Ahmed Khokhar and Ali Anwar Kandhro, Addl. Prosecutor General, Sindh for
Respondents Nos. 1 to 5. Ghulam Muhammad Barejo for
Respondents Nos. 6 and 7. Nemo for
Respondents Nos. 8 to 12.
Mst. SUMAIRA BIBI and another---Petitioners
VERSUS
The STATE and others---Respondents
Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)
Section: 364-A, 365-B, 452, 506-B, 148, 149
Law: Prevention of Trafficking In Persons Act, 2018
Section: 3
Law: Constitution of Pakistan
Section: 199
(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860) Ss. 364-A, 365-B, 452, 506-B, 148 & 149---Prevention of Trafficking in Persons Act (XXXIV of 2018), S. 3---Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 199---Constitutional petition---Abducting to compel for marriage, house trespass, criminal intimidation, rioting armed with deadly weapons and trafficking in persons---Quashing of FIR---Petitioner sought quashing of FIR registered against her husband for entering into marriage after abducting her---Validity---Petitioner was star witness of prosecution who in her statement recorded under S.161, Cr.P.C., categorically denied any abduction, coercion or lack of consent in her marriage to her husband---Petitioner affirmed that she was a major and had contracted marriage at her own in accordance with Shariat-e-Muhammadi---No material was placed on record to contradict such voluntary statement of petitioner---Investigating Officer did not produce any independent evidence, ocular or circumstantial, to supportgrave accusations under Ss.365-B, 364-A, 452, 148, 149, 506-B, P.P.C. and S.3 of Prevention of Trafficking in Persons Act, 2018---Continuation of such proceedings on the basis of a false narrative would amount to an abuse of the process of law---First Information Report registered against husband of petitioner was devoid of lawful foundation which was the product of mala fides and had constituted manifest abuse of process---High Court in such exceptional circumstances quashed the FIR along with its subsequent proceedings---High Court restrained respondents from causing any harassment to petitioners or their families---High Court directed the authorities to ensure effective protection to the lives of petitioners---Constitutional petition was allowed, in circumstances. Muhammad Uzair Ahmed Maniya v. Federation of Pakistan 2025 PCr.LJ 117; FIA v. Syed Hamid Ali Shah PLD 2023 SC 265; Rizwan Ellahi v. Province of Punjab PLD 2024 Lah. 379; Shahabuddin Shah v. Deputy District Officer 2007 CLC 700; Malik Gull Zaman v. Deputy Commissioner 2022 CLC 1261; Mst. Naila Parveen v. The State PLD 2011 Lah. 37; Hajra Khatoon v. SHO PS Fateh Jang PLD 2005 Lah. 316; Muhammad…