Pakistan Case LawMUHAMMAD ISMAIL Versus SHER MUHAMMAD and 7 others
This matter arises from a petition for leave to appeal against a judgment of the High Court, which quashed criminal proceedings initiated under a second F.I.R. regarding the alleged kidnapping of children. The petitioner, the husband of the deceased victim in a related murder case, challenged the High Court's decision on the grounds that the High Court lacked jurisdiction to interfere at the investigation stage. The core legal question presented is whether the High Court is competent to exercise its inherent powers to quash criminal proceedings under Section 561-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 when the matter is still under investigation and no challan has been presented in court. The Supreme Court granted leave to appeal to examine whether the High Court's impugned judgment aligns with the established legal principle laid down in Shahnaz Begum v. The Hon'ble Judges of the High Court of Sindh and Balochistan and another (PLD 1971 SC 677), which restricts the scope of judicial interference during the investigative phase of criminal proceedings. The Court seeks to determine if the High Court exceeded its jurisdiction by quashing an ongoing investigation.
- Can the High Court exercise its inherent powers under Section 561-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 to quash criminal proceedings while the matter is still at the investigation stage?
- Is the High Court competent to interfere with a police investigation before a challan has been presented in court?
ORDER
SAJJAD ALI SHAH, J.---It is submitted that Mst. Razia wife of the petitioner and her alleged paramour Muhammad Aslam alias Bola were murdered and in that connection F.I.R. Is filed by Sher Muhammad, who is real uncle of deceased Muhammad Aslam. In that case 7 persons have been named as accused and after completion of investigation, challan is presented in the Court. Second F.I.R. No, 127/93 is filed by Muhammad Ismail, who is husband of deceased Mst. Razia for offence under sections 363 and 365, P.P.C. About kidnapping of children of deceased Mst. Razia and her husband and in that case 5 persons are named as accused persons. In that case arising from second F.I.R., investigation is not complete and challan is not presented in the Court but accused persons named in that F.I.R. Filed application in the High Court for quashment under section 561-A, Cr.P.C., which is allowed.
2.Contention is raised before us that High Court was not competent to interfere as the matter was still at the stage of investigation and there were no proceedings pending in the Court which could have been quashed as contemplated under section 561-A, Cr.P.C. In support of the proposition, reliance is placed on the case of Shahnaz Begum v. The Hon'ble Judges of the High Court of Sindh and Balochistan and another (PLD 1971 SC 677). Leave is granted to examine whether impugned judgment of the High Court is in conformity with rule laid down by this Court in the reported case mentioned above.
Judges on this bench
- Sajjad Ali Shah1,895 judgments
- Muhammad Rafiq Tarar605 judgments