Qayum Nawaz Vs DPO DI Khan

JUDGMENT SHEET

IN THE PESHAWAR HIGH COURT,

D.I.KHAN BENCH

(Judicial Department)

W.P.No.841-D/2016

Qayum Nawaz and others

Versus

District Police Officer, D.I.Khan and others

JUDGMENT

Date of hearing: 05.3.2018.

Appellant-petitioner By: Mr Ahmad Ali Khan Marwat Advocate and Miss Shumaila Awan Advocate.

Respondent By: M/S Bahadar Khan Marwat and Mr.

Kamran Hayat Khan Miankhel

SHAKEEL AHMAD, J.- Through this constitutional petition filed under Article 199 of the Constitutional of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, the petitioners Qayum Nawaz and 04 others seek quashment of FIR No.204 dated 13.8.2016 registered under Sections 496- A/109 PPC at Police Station Yarik, D.I.Khan.

2.Brief facts of the case are that on 15.7.2016, the complainant/respondent No.4 Amanullah lodged a written report at Police Station Yarik to the effect that in the night between 20.21/03.2016, accused Atiqullah enticed away her daughter Asma Aman for the purpose of Imran/* (D.B.)Mr. Justice Ijaz Anwar and Mr. Justice Shakeel Ahmad, JJ

committing Zina alongwith gold ornaments weighing 04 tolas and cash amount of Rs.96,780/- at the behest of accused Shafiullah, Master Attaullah sons of Inayatullah, Inayatullah son of Habibullah, Mst. Sakina Bibi wife of Inayatullah, Mst. Samina daughter of Inayatullah and Qayum Nawaz son of Rabnawaz.

3.It is argued by the learned counsel for the petitioners that Mst. Asma Aman had entered into marriage with accused Atiqullah of her own free will on 21.3.2016 and to this effect her statement was recorded under Section 164 Cr.PC before the learned Judicial Magistrate-II, D.I.Khan on 25.8.2016, wherein she refuted the allegations of her abduction; that the whole family has been roped with malafide intention; that on the face of it, the FIR is false and frivolous. He prayed for quashment of FIR.

4.On the other hand, the learned Addl: A.G.

representing the State and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent/complainant jointly argued that on the face of it, the petitioners have committed a cognizable offence and the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the petitioners can only be adjudicated Imran/* (D.B.) Mr. Justice Ijaz Anwar and Mr. Justice Shakeel Ahmad, JJ

upon after recording pro and contra evidence and prayed for dismissal of the writ petition.

5.Arguments heard and record perused.

6.Perusal of the record reveals that the contents of FIR constitute commission of a cognizable offence and for reaching to a correct conclusion, proper investigation, inquiry and pro and contra evidence is required to be recorded in the Court of competent jurisdiction.

7.Coming to the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners that the alleged abductee has entered into marriage with accused Atiqullah of her own free will and she appeared before the learned Judicial Magistrate and got recorded her statement under Section 164 Cr.PC, this was recorded in the absence of the respondent/complainant party, and this statement, is yet to touch the taste of cross-examination. Therefore, in these circumstances the entertainment of this petition is unjustified on account of having no substance in it. In this respect we are fortified by the judgment of the apex Court in case reported as “Bashir Ahmad Vs. Zafer-ul-Islam” (PLD 2004 SC 298) and “Sher Afgan Khan Niazi Vs.

Ali Habib and others” (2011 SCMR 1813).

Imran/* (D.B.) Mr. Justice Ijaz Anwar and Mr. Justice Shakeel Ahmad, JJ

8.For what has been discussed above, the writ

petition being bereft of merit is dismissed.

Announced.

Dt:03.5.2018.

JUDGE

JUDGE

Imran/* (D.B.) Mr. Justice Ijaz Anwar and Mr. Justice Shakeel Ahmad, JJ