Pakistan Case Law
2017 YLRN 359

Mst. PERWAIZ Versus PROVINCE OF SINDH

โญ Prefer in Google
Citation2017 YLRN 359
CourtSindh High Court
Judge(s)Shahnawaz Tariq

ORDER

SHAHNAWAZ TARIQ, J.--- By this common order, I intend to dispose of C.P.No.S-888 of 2016, Cr. Misc. Application No.S-151 of 2016 and Cr. Misc. Application No.S-185 of 2016.

2. Through C.P.No.S-888 of 2016, petitioners Mst. Parvaiza and Ashraf have prayed to provide protection against official as well as private respondents. Cr. Misc. Application No.S-151 of 2016 has been filed by Mst. Parveza with the prayer to issue Rule Nisi to respondent No.3 SHO Police Station, Salehpat to recover her 19 days old son from the illegal custody of respondent No.4 Ashraf and produce him before this Court. Cr. Misc. Application No.S-185 of 2016 filed by applicant Muhammad Ashraf with the prayer to issue Rule Nisi to respondents No.2 to 4 to produce alleged detenue Mst. Parvaiza before this Court for recording her statement.

3. Learned counsel for Muhammad Ashraf contended that Mst. Parvaiza and Muhammad Ashraf contracted their love marriage after obtaining divorce from respondent Rab Dino; that spouses were residing together happily and they have already filed petition for protection and statement of Mst.Parveza was recorded, whereby she stated that she contracted her marriage out of her love affair with petitioner Muhammad Ashraf; that after about 02 months ago, private respondents abducted Mst. Parvaiza from his house and illegally detained her and petitioner Muhammad Ashraf also filed criminal miscellaneous application for issuance of Rule Nisi for her recovery and production before this Court for recording her statement.

4. Learned AAG files statements of respondent No.5 SHO Police Station, Khanpur Mahar and respondent No.2 ASI Liaquat Ali Napar 1.0 of Crime No.02/2016 under section 365-B, registered at Police Station, Lakhi Ghulam Shah P.P.C., which are taken on record. ASI Liaquat Ali Napar Investigating Officer of Crime No.02/2016 submits that Challan has been submitted in said crime and one nominated accused Lal Bux alias Laloo Mahar has been arrested and presently he is confined in Central Jail, Shikarpur. Learned AAG further submits that statement of Mst. Parvaiza was also recorded by this Court in C.P.No.888 of 2016 and she had disowned the allegations of her abduction by petitioner Muhammad Ashraf, hence respondent Rabdino alias Rabban had lodged false FIR No.02/2016 and proceedings of the said case may be quashed and accused Lal Bux alias Laloo Mahar may be released from Central Prison, Shikarpur.

5. Learned APG also adopted same arguments as advanced by learned AAG and further submitted that proceedings arising out of Crime No.02/2016 under section 365-B, P.P.C. may be quashed and accused may be released from Jail.

6. Perusal of record reflects that Mst. Parvaiza and Muhammad Ashraf filed C.P. No.5-888 of 2016 and appeared before this Court for providing protection and statement of Mst. Parvaiza was recorded on 07.03.2016, whereby she categorically stated that she being sui juris has sworn her affidavit of free will on 22.02.2016 and subsequently, performed her Nikah with Muhammad Ashraf out of their love affair and since then spouses are residing together happily. She further stated that previously she was married with respondent Rabban alias Rab Dino but afterward he pronounced divorce and she after passing Iddat period, contracted second marriage with Muhammad Ashraf and also prayed for providing legal protection. Consequently, SHO Police Station, Lakhi Ghulam Shah was directed to provide protection to both Mst.Parvaiz and Muhammad Ashraf. It is further averred that respondent No.10 Rabban alias Rab Dino lodged a false FIR No.02/2016 under section 365-B, Cr.P.C. at Police Station, Lakhi Ghulam Shah and therefore, SHO was directed not to cause arrest of petitioners in said FIR. The above referred statement of Mst. Parvaiza is self-explanatory and no case as alleged by respondent Rabdino, has been made out.

7. Pursuant to notice issued by this Court, SHO Police Station, Lakhi Ghulam Shah has produced alleged detenue Mst. Parvaiza before this Court. She submits that she has been residing with her mother happily and further prays to permit her to live with her mother as per her own accord. Consequently, she is permitted to reside with her mother according to her choice.

8. Mst. Parvaiza through Cr.M.A. No.151 of 2016, under section 491, Cr.P.C. has prayed to issue Rule Nisi to respondent No.3 SHO Police Station, Salehpat to recover her 19 days old son from the illegal custody of respondents and produce him before this Court. SHO Police Station Salehpat has filed statement dated 28.04.2016 along with copies of report issued by Admin Incharge of Mother and Child Healthcare Centre, dated 27.04.2014 and copy of FIR No.02/2016 under section 365-B, 34, P.P.C. lodged by Rab Dino. Learned APG contended that per record of Hospital neither Mst. Parvaiza was admitted in Hospital nor she gave birth to any child.

9. Perusal of record reflects that Mst. Parvaiza has failed to produce any tangible evidence to establish birth of her son and even her claim is controverted by official record of the hospital. Conversely, she neither disclosed name of her son nor date and time of birth of her son, thus her claim that she gave birth in hospital could not be believed.

10. Considering the above circumstances, C.P. No.S-888 of 2016, Cr. Misc. Application No.S-151 of 2015 and Cr. Misc. Application No. S-185 of 2016 stand disposed of. However, proceedings arising out of FIR No.02/2016, under section 365-B, 34, P.P.C. lodged by Rab Dino at Police Station, Lakhi Ghulam Shah and pending before the Court of learned V-Additional Sessions Judge, Shikarpur, stands quashed. Learned trial Court is directed to issue release writ for accused Lal Bux alias Laloo Mahar with direction to release him forthwith if he is not required in any other case. Office is also directed to transmit the copy of this order to the learned trial Court for immediate compliance.

WA/P-29/Sindh Order accordingly.

For educational and research use only โ€” not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.