AMEER REHMAN and others vs AMEER MUMTAZ and others
This matter concerns the initiation of proceedings against petitioners for potential abuse of the court's process, specifically regarding the obstruction of enforcement of a prior order and the potential fabrication of evidence. The Supreme Court had previously dismissed the petitioners' civil petition, affirming the respondents' title, and issued a show-cause notice regarding potential penal action under President's Order No. 12 of 1980 and Section 476 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. Upon hearing the petitioners, who pleaded a lack of mens rea due to their lack of education, the Court declined to make a factual determination on the existence of mens rea, noting it as an issue of fact. The Court held that allegations of perjury and fabrication of evidence must be treated with gravity to preserve the administration of justice and deter baseless litigation. Consequently, the Court directed the Sessions Judge, Swat, to entrust the matter to a competent court for trial in accordance with the law, requiring a report within six months. A related review petition was dismissed for lack of valid grounds.
- Can the Supreme Court delegate the trial of a matter involving potential abuse of process to a subordinate court?
- Is the determination of mens rea in proceedings concerning the obstruction of a court order an issue of fact to be decided by a trial court?
- Does the fabrication of documentary evidence and perjury warrant formal legal proceedings to protect the administration of justice?
- Paragraph 12, President's Order No. 12 of 1980
- Section 476, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
' JAWWAD S. KHAWAJA, J.---C.M.A.-3305/14:-On 21-5-2014 while deciding C.P. No,740 of 2013 we had passed an order dismissing the said petition with costs. However, while dismissing the petition, we had also observed as under:- " (8) In the foregoing circumstances, we hold that the title of the private respondents stood established and there no necessity for reopening the issue of title considering the circumstances which have been narrated above. We have, however, considered the possibility of taking action against the petitioners under para 12 of President's Order No,12 of 1980, which provides as under:- "Punishment,---Whoever obstructs any person in enforcing or giving effect to any decision or order made under this Order shall be punishable with rigorous imprisonment for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both."
(9) In the alternate, we may also consider initiating proceedings inter alia, under section 476 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898. We cannot allow abuse of process of the Court as it undermines the credibility of the Court.
(10) Let notice issue to the petitioners to show cause as to why such action should not be initiated.
Notice shall also issue to the respondents. Mr. Sher Muhammad Khan, learned Advocate Supreme Court accepts notice on behalf of the private respondents. The office shall create a separate file and list this matter for hearing after thirty days. The petition stands dismissed with costs."
' Pursuant to. The notice which was issued to Ameer Rehman, Rehm Dad, Muhammad Nawab and Pir Jamal petitioners in C.P.-740/2013, a separate file was created which is before us. We have heard learned counsel for the aforesaid Ameer Rehman, etc. He has taken us through the order passed by us on 21-5-2014. His main plea is that the aforesaid persons namely Ameer Rehman, etc. Are not highly educated, and therefore, there was absence of mens rea and as a consequence the notice issued to them should be discharged. In the present proceedings, it is not for us to make a factual determination of the existence or otherwise of mens rea, this being an issue of fact. Learned counsel for respondents Ameer Mumtaz, etc. Has, however, drawn our attention to an application filed on 3-11-2012 by Ameer Rehman, etc. This application is written in Urdu and is signed by Ameer Rehman, etc. And makes mention of the order dated 18-2-1976. We, however, would not like to make any further comment as it may cause prejudice to the trial which we now propose to order.
2. In the foregoing circumstances, we send the matter to the learned Sessions Judge, Swat who shall entrust it to a competent Court for proceedings in accordance with law against Ameer Rehman, etc. For the reasons which we have given for taking notice of this matter, it is expected that the trial shall be concluded expeditiously. A report shall be submitted in Court within six months from today for our perusal in Chambers.
3. We would like to add that perjury and fabrication of documentary evidence are to be taken very seriously by Courts. This is necessary for ensuring that the administration of justice is not undermined and that baseless and false litigation is also deterred. The listed matters stand disposed of.
CRP-295/2014:- No valid ground for review is made out. The review petition is, therefore, dismissed.