Mst. GULNAZ BIBI vs Mian MUHAMMAD YOUNAS, S.-I. and 2 others

ORDER

' Through this petition Mst. Gulnaz Bibi petitioner has sought quashing of F.I.R. No, 125 registered at Police Station Tarkhani, District Faisalabad on 2-5-2003 for offences under section 10/11 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979. The said criminal case has been lodged by respondent No,3 herein in respect of an alleged abduction of and commission of Zina with the present petitioner by Muhammad Ramzan accused and others. The petitioner happens to be a daughter of respondent No,3. The petitioner, respondent No,3 and Muhammad Ramzan accused are all present before this Court in person today and the parties as well as their learned counsel have been heard by this Court at some length.

2. Mst. Gulnaz Bibi petitioner has stated her age to be about twenty years and has categorically maintained that she is major, pubert, adult and sui juris. She has categorically and emphatically controverted and denied the allegation contained in the impugned F.I.R. Regarding her abduction by Muhammad Ramzan accused and others and has maintained that she has in fact contracted marriage with Muhammad Ramzan accused on 23-4-2003 of her own free will and volition. The learned counsel for the petitioner has referred to the document appended with this petition as Annexure-A which is a registered Nikahnama showing marriage between the petitioner and Muhammad Ramzan accused. The learned counsel for the petitioner has also referred to the document annexed with this petition as Annexure-C to establish that Muhammad Ramzan accused was previously professing Christian faith and on 234-2003 he had embraced Islam before marrying the petitioner. The learned Additional Advocate-General has pointed out that the case in hand was investigated by the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Samundari, District Faisalabad and he has already recommended cancellation of the impugned F.I.R. As the allegations contained therein had been found by him to be factually incorrect. The learned counsel for respondent No,3 has doubted the validity or correctness of the marriage between the petitioner and Muhammad Ramzan accused and she has confined her arguments mainly to that aspect of the matter.

3. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties as well as the parties themselves it has transpired that as regards the allegation regarding the offence under Section 11 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979 Mst. Gulnaz Bibi petitioner happens to be the star prosecution witness in that respect being the alleged abductee herself and she has emphatically controverted the said allegation contained in the impugned F.I.R. Regarding her abduction. As far as the allegation regarding commission of Zina by the petitioner with Muhammad Ramzan accused and others is concerned the said allegation is refuted by the petitioner on the basis of the above-mentioned Nikahnama. A presumption of correctness is attached to a registered Nikahnama and so far there is nothing available on the record of investigation to rebut the said presumption. In these circumstances lodging of the impugned F.I.R. By respondent No,3 has clearly appeared to this Court to be an outcome of frustration and malice on the part of respondent No,3.

Allowing such an F.I.R. To continue to hold the field is to amount to an abuse of the process of law which cannot be allowed by this Court to be perpetuated. This petition is, therefore, admitted to regular hearing and allowed with no order as to costs and the above mentioned impugned F.I.R. Is hereby quashed.

F.I.R. Quashed.