MUSHTAQ AHMED vs THE STATE And Another
This petition for leave to appeal challenged a High Court judgment that dismissed an application under Section 561-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 for the quashment of criminal proceedings. The petitioner, a tenant, had faced a private complaint initiated by his landlady under Section 7 of the Offence of Qazf (Enforcement of Hadd) Ordinance, 1979, and Sections 500 and 506-B of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, following a dispute involving allegations of defamation and public nuisance. The petitioner contended that the averments in the complaint did not constitute an offence under Section 3 of the Ordinance. The Supreme Court examined the High Court's refusal to quash the proceedings. The Court held that the High Court correctly exercised its discretion in determining that the application for quashment was premature at that stage of the proceedings. Consequently, the Supreme Court found no legal infirmity in the impugned judgment and refused leave to appeal. The principle affirmed is that the High Court's inherent power to quash proceedings under Section 561-A, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 is discretionary and should not be invoked prematurely when a case is pending before a subordinate court.
- Can the High Court quash criminal proceedings under Section 561-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 if the application is deemed premature?
- Does the High Court have discretion in exercising its inherent powers to quash pending criminal proceedings?
- Is a private complaint under the Offence of Qazf (Enforcement of Hadd) Ordinance, 1979 subject to immediate quashment if the petitioner claims no offence is made out?
- Section 561-A, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 7, Offence of Qazf (Enforcement of Hadd) Ordinance, 1979
- Section 500, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 506-B, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 107, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 117, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 3, Offence of Qazf (Enforcement of Hadd) Ordinance, 1979
ORDER
AJMAL MIAN, J.---This is a petition for leave to appeal against the judgment dated 7-4-1991 passed by a learned single Judge of the High Court of Sindh in Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.8 of 1991, filed by the petitioner under section 561-A, Cr. P.C. For seeking quashment of criminal proceedings initiated by respondent No. 2 by filing a private complaint under section 7 of the Offence of Qazf (Enforcement of Hadd) Ordinance, 1979, hereinafter referred to as the Ordinance, and under sections 500 and 506-B, P.P.C. In the Court of VIth Additional Sessions Judge, South Karachi, dismissing the same.
2. The facts to be noted are that respondent No.2 is a landlady of a property situated in Sindhi Muslim Housing Society, Karachi, whereas the petitioner and one Fawwad Mushtaq, are residing on the ground floor of the suit property as her tenants. It seems that respondent No.2 had initiated proceedings for ejectment of her above tenants before the Rent Controller. After that, the petitioner filed a complaint under section 107/117, P.P.C. Against respondent No.2. Thereupon, respondent No. 2 filed written complaint before the Deputy Commissioner on 7-10-1990, which was followed by a complaint dated 7-10-1990 filed by the petitioner before the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Saddar, Karachi, which reads as follows:-- "My landlady, Mst. Shahnaz Ali, according to my observation and information cannot be described to be a person of good repute. The unfortunate part is that her. Daughter Nazish Ali, also appears to be following the footsteps of her mother.
As mentioned above, I belong to a respectable family and live on the ground floor of the above premises with my family members including daughters.
Owing to my landlady and her friends/associates being frequented by men of questionable character, I suggested to her to kindly refrain from such activities not only detrimental and offensive to my family but also to the vicinity. NOT ONLY DID SHE DECLINE MY THIS REQUEST, BUT UNLEASHED AGAINST ME AND MY FAMILY MEMBERS A COMPLAINT INTENDED TO CAUSE ME HARM, ILL REPUTE, HARASSMENT AND INTIMIDATION.
Sir, the list of affictions is more than lenghty BUT I WILL ADVERT YOUR ATTENTION TO ONLY THE UNDERNOTED:--
(1) They spared no attempt to find opportune moments to hurl at us the most abusive, foul and filthy language.
(2) They embarked upon an unending process of threatening us.
(3) They have ensured that the water supply to our ground-floor premises iscut off from time to time.
(4) They carried on with all kinds of obscene activities and thereby, on the whole, causing public nuisance.
(5) They have constructed (on the roof), QUITE ILLEGALLY, a factory which has made the premises open to public thoroughfare and have, thus skillfully shattered the peace of the demised premises.
I now solicit you to kindly immediately take such measures and steps which you deem fit and proper and in accordance with law."
3. Thereupon, respondent No. 2 filed aforesaid private complaint. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, after examining the complainant and her daughter, issued the process. Thereupon, the petitioner filed aforesaid miscellaneous application, which was declined by the learned Judge in chambers. Therefore, the petitioner has filed the above petition for leave to appeal.
4. In support of the above petition, Sardar Muhammad Ishaq, learned ASC appearing for the petitioner, has vehemently urged that on the basis of averments contained in the private complaint and the supporting statements recorded by the learned Additional Sessions Judge,. No case has been made out under section 3 of the Ordinance and, therefore, the High Court should have allowed the petitioner's above quashment application.
5. Suffice to observe that under section 561-A, Cr.P.C., the High Court has the discretion to quash any proceedings pending in any Court subordinate to it. In the present case, the High Court has not shut out the petitioner but was of the view that the petitioner's above application for quashment was premature. We do not find any infirmity in the impugned judgment. Leave is, accordingly, refused.