ALLAH DITTA AND ANOTHER vs Mst. KHURSHID BEGUM AND ANOTHER
This is a petition seeking leave to appeal against the order of the High Court dated 13-11-1982, whereby a habeas corpus petition filed by respondent No. 1 was accepted and the detenu was ordered to be released. The core legal question before the Supreme Court was whether the High Court's order in habeas corpus proceedings granting freedom to the detenu bars the husband or father from taking legal or criminal proceedings against the detenu or her alleged paramour for any alleged criminal offenses. The Supreme Court dismissed the petition, holding that the apprehension of the petitioners is misconceived and that the order of the High Court does not stand in the way of proceedings being taken against any party who may be committing a criminal offense. The key principle laid down is that habeas corpus orders releasing a detenu do not grant immunity from future or independent criminal proceedings.
- Does a habeas corpus order releasing a detenu bar criminal proceedings against the detenu or other parties?
- Can a husband initiate legal proceedings against his wife or her alleged paramour despite a High Court habeas corpus order releasing her?
ORDER
1. ' NASIM HASAN SHAH, J.-The High Court, vide its order dated 13-11-1982, accepted the habeas corpus petition filed by Mst Khurshid Begum, respondent No, 1 herein and ordered the release of the detenu Mst. Shamim Begum allowing her to go alongwith.List. Khurshid Begum, afore-mentioned. This is a petition seeking leave to appeal against the said order of the High Court.
2. After hearing Mian Yasin Watto, Advocate, we feel that he is not in a position to challenge the correctness of the impugned order of the High Court on any cogent ground, His main apprehension, however, seems to be that the alleged detenu Mst. Shamim Begum, who. After the order of the High Court, is living with Mst. Khurshid Begum but having illicit relations with one Mumtaz, the brother of the said Mst. Khurshid Begum, cannot be taken into account either by petitioner No, I, who is the husband of Mst. Shamim Begum, nor her father, petitioner No, 2 herein. In other words, they cannot take any proceedings against Mst. Shamim Begum or her alleged paramour Mumtaz on account of the order of the High Court dated 13-11-1982 passed while disposing of the habeas corpus petition.
3. ' The apprehension of the learned counsel is entirely misconcieved. The order of the High Court does not stand in the way of proceedings being taken against any party who may be committing a criminal offense.
4. ' There is no force in this petition, which is hereby dismissed.