Pakistan Case LawLatest Judgments
Newly reported judgments from the Supreme Court of Pakistan, the High Courts and tribunals, added as they are processed — free, full text, updated daily. Judgments marked NEW were added in the most recent update. 79,348 judgments in total from the Lahore High Court.
- Muhammad Aslam vs Rent Controller and others1995 MLD 474 · Lahore High Court · 1993-01-31Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Aslam vs Rent Controller And Other1995 MLD 474 · Lahore High Court · 1993-01-31Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Aslam vs Punjab Public Service Commission and others1995 PLC (C.S.) 159 · Lahore High Court · 1993-10-24Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Aslam vs Muhammad Tufail and 2 others1995 CLC 1061 · Lahore High Court · 1994-11-24Read full judgment →
Summary & questions settled
This civil revision petition arises out of a suit for declaration, permanent injunction, and joint possession filed by the respondents-plaintiffs against the petitioner-defendant concerning a residential property originally owned by their deceased father, Naqshoo. The respondents challenged a 1971 mutation of sale in favour of the petitioner as fraudulent, without consideration, and void. The trial court and the first appellate court decreed the suit in favour of the respondents, finding the mutation doubtful due to a low sale price, lack of best evidence, and a delayed disclosure. The Lahore High Court, upon reviewing the record, held that the concurrent findings of the lower courts were based on misreading and non-reading of evidence. The High Court ruled that public documents like revenue mutations carry a presumption of truth, that the initial burden to prove fraud was not discharged by the respondents, and that the execution of a contemporaneous mutual family agreement and related transactions sufficiently supported the validity of the transfer. Furthermore, the Court found the suit to be barred by limitation under Article 120 of the Limitation Act 1908. The civil revision was accepted and the lower courts' judgments were set aside.
Questions settled- Does a revenue mutation incorporated in the record of rights carry a presumption of truth under the land revenue law?
- What is the limitation period for filing a suit to challenge a mutation on the ground of fraud?
- Can concurrent findings of fact by lower courts be interfered with by the High Court if they are based on misreading or non-reading of evidence?
- On whom does the initial burden of proof lie when fraud is alleged with regard to a registered or sanctioned revenue document?
- Muhammad Aslam vs Muhammad Gul and others1995 P Cr. L J 1733 · Lahore High Court · 1995-04-09Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Aslam vs Mst. Razia Sultana1995 PLD Lahore 287 · Lahore High Court · 1995-04-02Read full judgment →
Summary & questions settled
The matter arises from a constitutional petition challenging the judgment and decree passed by the Family Court, which decreed a suit for dissolution of marriage on the basis of Khula'. The core legal question was whether a Family Court can grant dissolution of marriage on the ground of Khula' when the plaintiff primarily sought jactitation of marriage with an alternative prayer for dissolution, and whether absence of a specific issue regarding Khula' prejudices the trial. The Lahore High Court held that even if a wife omits to explicitly frame an issue for Khula', the Court may grant dissolution on that basis if evidence establishes extreme aversion and that refusing it would result in a hateful union violating the limits prescribed by Allah. Furthermore, the Court noted that a wife has the right to repudiate a marriage contracted during her minority upon attaining puberty. The petition was dismissed in limine as the concurrent findings of fact called for no interference in extraordinary constitutional jurisdiction.
Questions settled- Can a court grant a decree for dissolution of marriage on the basis of Khula' when the plaintiff originally filed a suit for jactitation of marriage with an alternative prayer for dissolution?
- Whether the absence of a specific framed issue regarding Khula' vitiates a family court judgment where evidence of extreme aversion is present on record?
- Does a wife have the right to repudiate a Nikah performed during her minority upon attaining the age of puberty?
- Muhammad Aslam vs Govt. of Punjab Through The Home Secretary, CivilK.L.R. 1995 Labour & Service Cases 102 · Lahore High Court · 1995-01-26Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Aslam vs (Mst.) Razia SultanaK.L.R. 1995 Civil Cases 451 · Lahore High Court · 1995-04-02Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Aslam Tahir-Ul-Qadri vs Government of Pakistan through Ministry of Defence, Islamabad and 5 others1995 PLC (C.S.) 498 · Lahore High Court · 1994-12-18Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Aslam Pervez Alias Ghazi vs The State1995 MLD 664 · Lahore High Court · 1994-09-20Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Aslam And Others vs Muhammad Shafi1995 MLD 441 · Lahore High Court · 1994-04-19Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Aslam and others vs Government of the Punjab and others1995 PLC (C.S.) 419 · Lahore High Court · 1994-01-09Read full judgment →
Summary & questions settled
This matter involves multiple constitutional petitions filed by civil servants serving in the Irrigation Department, Government of the Punjab, challenging the termination of their services. The core legal question is whether the summary termination of ad hoc civil servants without issuing show-cause notices or providing an opportunity of hearing is lawful. The Lahore High Court held that passing adverse orders without affording a hearing violates the principles of natural justice, rendering the impugned termination orders void, coram non judice, and without lawful authority. The key principle laid down is that no adverse order can be passed against any person without providing them an opportunity of being heard.
Questions settled- Whether the services of ad hoc civil servants can be terminated without issuing a show-cause notice?
- Does passing an adverse order against a civil servant without an opportunity of hearing violate the principles of natural justice?
- Are termination orders passed without hearing the affected employees without lawful authority and of no legal consequence?
- Muhammad Aslam and 2 others vs The State1995 P Cr. L J 953 · Lahore High Court · 1995-02-15Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Aslam alias Ashraf vs The State1995 P Cr. L J 1637 · Lahore High Court · 1995-04-06Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Asif Khan vs The StateK.L.R. 1995 Criminal Cases 67 · Lahore High Court · 1994-09-22Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Ashraf vs The Rent Controller EtcK.L.R. 1995 Civil Cases 356 · Lahore High Court · 1994-12-11Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Ashraf vs Rent Controller/Civil Judge Ist Class,1995 MLD 742 · Lahore High Court · -Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Ashraf vs Muhammad Zahid alias Zahidi1995 P Cr. L J 674 · Lahore High Court · 1994-06-26Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Ashraf vs Mst. Bushra Shaheen and 2 others1995 PLD Lahore 44 · Lahore High Court · 1994-08-31Read full judgment →
Summary & questions settled
This writ petition arose from a matrimonial dispute where the petitioner challenged an order directing him to pay maintenance to his former wife. The petitioner contended that the Arbitration Council lacked jurisdiction under the Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1961, because the marriage had been dissolved prior to the maintenance application. Additionally, the petitioner argued that the ex parte maintenance order was passed without proper service and that the revisional court erred regarding the limitation period for filing a revision. The Court held that an ex-wife may competently file for maintenance before an Arbitration Council for the period during which the marriage subsisted, as the term 'wife' in the Ordinance includes a divorced woman for such claims. Regarding service, the Court found that the petitioner had been duly served through registered post, pasting of notices, and publication. Finally, the Court affirmed that Rule 16(1) of the rules framed under the Ordinance, which prescribes a thirty-day limitation period for revision, is intra vires the statute, as the Ordinance itself does not provide a 'reasonable time' standard for revisions.
Questions settled- Can a divorced wife invoke the jurisdiction of an Arbitration Council under the Muslim Family Laws Ordinance 1961 to claim maintenance for the period when the marriage was subsisting?
- Is Rule 16(1) of the rules framed under the Muslim Family Laws Ordinance 1961, which prescribes a thirty-day limitation for revision petitions, intra vires the Ordinance?
- Does the Muslim Family Laws Ordinance 1961 provide a 'reasonable time' standard for filing revision petitions against maintenance orders, or is it governed by the prescribed rules?
- Muhammad Ashraf vs Liaqat Ali and others1995 P Cr. L J 1598 · Lahore High Court · 1995-04-03Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Ashraf vs Liaqat Ali And OtherK.L.R.1995 Shariat Cases 49 · Lahore High Court · 1995-04-03Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Ashraf vs Federation of Pakistan and others1995 PLC (C.S.) 42 · Lahore High Court · 1994-05-15Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Ashraf Shakar vs S.H.O., Police Station Hujra Shah1995 P Cr. L J 1656 · Lahore High Court · 1995-03-21Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Ashraf Khan vs The State and others1995 P Cr. L J 2016 · Lahore High Court · 1995-02-09Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Ash Raf vs Rent Controller/Civil Judge Ist Class,1995 MLD 742 · Lahore High Court · 1994-12-01Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Asghar vs The State1995 MLD 230 · Lahore High Court · 1994-08-16Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Asghar vs Ijaz Ahmed and anothers1995 P Cr. L J 1770 · Lahore High Court · 1995-04-04Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Asghar Khan And Others vs The State1995 MLD 1296 · Lahore High Court · 1995-03-14Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Arshad, And Other vs The StateK.L.R. 1997 Criminal Cases 578 · Lahore High Court · 1996-01-15Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Arshad vs The State And AnotherK.L.R. 1995 Criminal Cases 78 · Lahore High Court · 1994-09-01Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Arshad Bhindar vs The StateK.L.R. 1997 Criminal Cases 631 · Lahore High Court · 1997-03-24Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Arshad and 2 others vs The State1995 P Cr. L J 1663 · Lahore High Court · 1995-03-22Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Anwar vs Station House Officer And 3 OtherK.L.R. 1997 Criminal Cases 595 · Lahore High Court · 1995-10-09Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Anwar vs R.M. EtcK.L.R. 1997 Criminal Cases 643 · Lahore High Court · 1995-11-02Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Anwar Shah vs The State1995 MLD 103 · Lahore High Court · 1994-10-05Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Anwar Khan And Other vs The StateK.L.R. 1995 Criminal Cases 403 · Lahore High Court · 1995-02-01Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Anwar and others vs Mian Noor Ahmad and others1995 MLD 269 · Lahore High Court · 1994-05-15Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Anwar And Others vs Mian Noor Ahmad And Other1995 MLD 269 · Lahore High Court · 1994-05-15Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Anwar and 2 others vs The State1995 P Cr. L J 956 · Lahore High Court · 1995-02-07Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Ansar vs The StateK.L.R. 1997 Criminal Cases 567 · Lahore High Court · 1997-05-13Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Anayat vs The State1995 P Cr. L J 2027 · Lahore High Court · 1995-06-26Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Anar vs The State1995 MLD 1503 · Lahore High Court · 1994-06-27Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Amjad vs The StateK.L.R. 1997 Criminal Cases 470 · Lahore High Court · 1997-01-13Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Amin and others vs Syed Kazim Hussain and others1995 MLD 446 · Lahore High Court · 1994-04-02Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Amin And Others vs Syed Kazim Hussain And Other1995 MLD 446 · Lahore High Court · 1994-04-02Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Amin And Another vs The StateK.L.R. 1995 Criminal Cases 261 · Lahore High Court · 1994-11-15Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Ameen vs The State1995 P Cr. L J 637 · Lahore High Court · 1993-03-22Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Altaf vs The StateK.L.R. 1995 Shariat Cases 27 · Lahore High Court · 1995-01-22Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Ali vs The StateK.L.R. 1997 Criminal Cases 333 · Lahore High Court · 1992-10-17Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Ali vs Muhammad Hussain1995 MLD 5 · Lahore High Court · 1994-06-15Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Ali vs Mst. Subuhi Begum1995 CLC 981 · Lahore High Court · 1994-11-29Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Ali Etc vs Muhammad AmirK.L.R. 1995 Civil Cases 119 · Lahore High Court · 1994-10-20Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Ali and others vs The State1995 P Cr. L J 289 · Lahore High Court · 1993-01-18Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Ali and others vs Secretary (Consolidation) and others1995 CLC 406 · Lahore High Court · 1994-03-07Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Ali and others vs Muhammad Amir1995 PLD Lahore 124 · Lahore High Court · 1993-10-20Read full judgment →
Summary & questions settled
This second appeal arises from a suit for possession and declaration filed by the respondent against the appellants, challenging a mutation of sale of land executed in 1961 on the ground that it was illegal and without a registered sale deed. The trial court and lower appellate court decreed the suit in favor of the respondent. The core legal questions involved whether a suit for declaration against an oral or defectively documented sale transaction is barred by limitation, whether a plaintiff can take advantage of their own wrong to undo a transaction, and whether a thumb-marked report recorded in the Rozenamcha of a Patwari satisfies the writing requirement of part performance under section 53-A of the Transfer of Property Act. The Lahore High Court allowed the appeal and dismissed the respondent's suit, holding that the suit was barred by limitation under Article 120 of the Limitation Act, that the plaintiff could not take advantage of his own wrong to dispossess the vendee, and that a signed or thumb-marked report recorded by a Patwari constitutes sufficient 'writing' to attract the protection of section 53-A of the Transfer of Property Act 1882.
Questions settled- Whether a suit seeking a declaration that a mutation is fictitious and fraudulent is governed by Article 120 of the Limitation Act 1908?
- Can a vendor who transferred land through an oral transaction and a report recorded in the Patwari's Rozenamcha subsequently maintain a suit for possession and declaration?
- Does a thumb-marked report recorded in the Rozenamcha of a Patwari satisfy the requirement of a writing signed by the transferor under section 53-A of the Transfer of Property Act 1882?
- Whether the equitable relief of declaration can be refused to a plaintiff whose conduct is unconscionable or who attempts to take advantage of his own wrong?
- Muhammad Ali And Other vs Muhammad AmirK.L.R. 1995 Revenue Cases 40 · Lahore High Court · 1994-11-20Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Aleem vs Town Committee, Samasatta and another1995 PLC (C.S.) 670 · Lahore High Court · 1994-11-29Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Akram vs The State1995 P Cr. L J 1037 · Lahore High Court · 1994-08-31Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Akram Sajjad vs The StateK.L.R. 1995 Criminal Cases 10 · Lahore High Court · 1994-09-12Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Akram Bhatti, Etc. vs Govt of Punjab, Etc.K.L.R. 1997 Civil Cases 539 · Lahore High Court · 1997-05-23Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Akram And Others vs District Collector/Settlement1995 MLD 67 · Lahore High Court · 1994-05-16Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Akram and others vs District Collector/Settlement1995 MLD 67 · Lahore High Court · 1994-05-16Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Akram and another vs The State1995 P Cr. L J 1137 · Lahore High Court · 1995-01-31Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Akram alias Gaman vs The State1995 P Cr. L J 122 · Lahore High Court · 1994-06-04Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Akhtar vs The State1995 P Cr. L J 1375 · Lahore High Court · 1995-04-10Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Akbar vs Muhammad ChiraghK.L.R. 1995 Revenue Cases 133 · Lahore High Court · 1995-07-12Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Akbar vs Muhammad Charagh1995 CLC 2016 · Lahore High Court · 1995-07-12Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Akbar and others vs Sher Muhammad and others1995 MLD 505 · Lahore High Court · 1994-06-15Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Akbar And Others vs Sher Muhammad And Other1995 MLD 505 · Lahore High Court · 1994-06-15Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Akbar and others vs Riaz Hussain and others1995 MLD 1943 · Lahore High Court · 1995-07-06Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Akbar And Others vs Riaz Hussain And Other1995 MLD 1943 · Lahore High Court · 1995-07-06Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Ajmal And Other vs S.H.O. P.S. Sara-E-Sadhu Dist KhanewalK.L.R. 1997 Criminal Cases 624 · Lahore High Court · 1996-03-07Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Ahsan vs The State and 6 others1995 P Cr. L J 147 · Lahore High Court · 1994-10-20Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Ahsan vs Amanullah Khan Niazi and OtherK.L.R. 1997 Criminal Cases 101 · Lahore High Court · 1994-07-03Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Afzal vs The State1995 MLD 85 · Lahore High Court · 1994-07-13Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Afzal vs Judge Family Court and others1995 CLC 1418 · Lahore High Court · 1994-05-04Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Afzal Shah vs Additional District Judge, Daska and 31995 CLC 312 · Lahore High Court · 1994-10-18Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Afzal Khan And Another vs The StateK.L.R. 1997 Criminal Cases 375 · Lahore High Court · 1989-12-02Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Abdullah vs Muhammad AsgharK.L.R. 1995 Criminal Cases 556 · Lahore High Court · 1994-12-21Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Abdullah vs Muhammad Asghar and others1995 MLD 787 · Lahore High Court · 1994-12-21Read full judgment →
- Muhammad Abdullah vs Muhammad Asghar And Other1995 MLD 787 · Lahore High Court · 1995-12-21Read full judgment →
- Muh Ammad Yar vs Province of Punjab, Etc.K.L.R 1997 Civil Cases 452 · Lahore High Court · 1997-11-01Read full judgment →
- Mubashar Ahmad Alias Bashari vs The StateK.L.R. 1997 Criminal Cases 277 · Lahore High Court · 1996-12-04Read full judgment →
- Mst. Zubaida Begum vs Chief Administrator, Auqaf and others1995 CLC 663 · Lahore High Court · 1994-04-26Read full judgment →
- Mst. Zohra Begum and 6 others vs Muhammad Ismail1995 CLC 242 · Lahore High Court · 1994-11-03Read full judgment →
Summary & questions settled
This civil revision petition challenged the concurrent findings of the lower courts regarding the nature of a registered sale deed dated 20-11-1962. The petitioners alleged that the transaction was Benami, asserting that their predecessor-in-interest, Taj Din, was the actual purchaser, while the respondent, Muhammad Ismail, was merely an ostensible owner. The core legal question was whether the petitioners had sufficiently discharged the burden of proving the Benami nature of the sale. The High Court dismissed the petition, holding that the petitioners failed to provide cogent, definitive evidence to substantiate their claim. The Court affirmed that the burden of proof rests entirely on the party asserting a Benami transaction, which must be established through legal testimony rather than suspicion. Key principles laid down include that the court must evaluate the source of purchase money, possession, custody of title deeds, and the parties' subsequent conduct. Furthermore, the Court emphasized that a party's failure to testify regarding matters within their personal knowledge warrants an adverse inference, thereby upholding the validity of the registered sale deed.
Questions settled- Upon whom does the burden of proof lie to establish that a registered sale transaction is Benami?
- Can a court draw an adverse inference against a party who fails to appear as a witness to support their own claim?
- What factors should a court consider when determining whether a transaction is Benami?
- Is a concurrent finding of fact by lower courts regarding the nature of a sale transaction subject to interference in revisional jurisdiction?
- Mst. Zaib-UN-Nisa vs The Government of the Punjab, Department of Education through Secretary and 4 others1995 CLC 1281 · Lahore High Court · 1995-02-27Read full judgment →
Summary & questions settled
This writ petition was filed by the petitioner, a C.T. Teacher appointed by the Mayor of the Metropolitan Corporation, Lahore in December 1992, seeking the payment of her unpaid salary and allowances for services rendered continuously since her appointment. The core legal question was whether an employee performing duties against a substantive vacancy can be denied salary on the ground that her appointment lacked prior government approval or subsequent formal regularization. The Lahore High Court held that the petitioner, having duly performed her duties as a teacher, is legally entitled to full emoluments in her grade and pay scale, as the law does not contemplate unpaid service. The Court laid down the key principles that forcing an employee to work without wages is contrary to Islamic injunctions, constitutes forced labour prohibited under Article 11 of the Constitution of Pakistan 1973, violates the Principles of Policy regarding fair employment and livelihood under Article 29, and contravenes the State's duty to eliminate exploitation under Article 3. The petition was accepted with a direction to the respondents to immediately release all unpaid salaries and allowances from the date of joining.
Questions settled- Whether a local council employee who has performed duties against a substantive vacancy can be denied salary for want of formal government approval?
- Does extracting service from an employee without remuneration amount to forced labour under Article 11 of the Constitution of Pakistan 1973?
- Are state authorities bound to pay wages to an employee in view of the Principles of Policy and the prohibition against exploitation under the Constitution of Pakistan 1973?
- Mst. Zaib-UN-Nisa vs Sikandar and 3 others1995 CLC 588 · Lahore High Court · 1994-12-13Read full judgment →
- Mst. Zahida Bibi vs The State1995 P Cr. L J 1525 · Lahore High Court · 1995-04-20Read full judgment →
- Mst. Waziran Mai vs Ghulam Hashim and 5 others1995 P Cr. L J 1513 · Lahore High Court · 1995-02-22Read full judgment →
- Mst. Waziran and others vs Superintendent of Police, Bhakkar and others1995 P Cr. L J 996 · Lahore High Court · 1994-11-15Read full judgment →
- Mst. Wafa Jan vs Mahram Zad1995 CLC 2002 · Lahore High Court · 1995-07-03Read full judgment →
Summary & questions settled
This civil revision petition challenges an appellate judgment that upheld the dismissal of a pre-emption suit due to the plaintiff's failure to deposit the required one-third of the sale price within the statutory timeframe. The central issue was whether the trial court possessed the discretion to extend the time for depositing the pre-emption money beyond the mandatory period prescribed by law, and whether the failure to deposit within the specified time necessitated the dismissal of the suit. The Court held that under the Punjab Pre-emption Act, 1991, the requirement to deposit one-third of the sale price within thirty days of the suit's institution is mandatory. The Court lacks jurisdiction to extend this period beyond thirty days. The Court emphasized that the 1991 Act is more stringent than the repealed 1913 Act, removing judicial discretion to extend time for deposits. Consequently, failure to comply with the deposit deadline results in the mandatory dismissal of the suit, rendering the trial court's dismissal legally sound.
Questions settled- Does the Court have the power to extend the period for depositing one-third of the sale price under the Punjab Pre-emption Act, 1991?
- Is the requirement to deposit one-third of the sale price within thirty days of the institution of a pre-emption suit mandatory?
- What are the consequences of failing to deposit the pre-emption money within the time fixed by the Court under the Punjab Pre-emption Act, 1991?
- Mst. Taj Mehal vs Haji Karim Khan1995 P Cr. L J 871 · Lahore High Court · 1994-12-19Read full judgment →
- Mst. Surraya Bibi vs The State and anothers1995 P Cr. L J 1927 · Lahore High Court · 1995-05-25Read full judgment →
- Mst. Sherifan Begum vs State1997 MLD 196 · Lahore High Court · 1995-05-03Read full judgment →
- Mst. Shehnaz. vs The State and 3 others1995 P Cr. L J 868 · Lahore High Court · 1994-10-20Read full judgment →
Summary & questions settled
This constitutional petition was filed under Article 199 of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, seeking a direction to an Area Magistrate to record the petitioner's statement under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. The petitioner, alleged to be an abductee in a case registered under the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance 1979, sought to have her statement recorded by a Magistrate in Lahore, despite the case being registered in Faisalabad. The core legal question was whether a Magistrate is under a mandatory statutory obligation to record a statement under Section 164, Cr.P.C. upon request, and whether the refusal to do so constitutes a failure of lawful authority. The Court held that the power under Section 164, Cr.P.C. is discretionary, not mandatory, and the Magistrate is not obligated to record a statement merely upon a request. The Court further emphasized that an abductee should first approach the Investigating Officer. Consequently, the petition was dismissed as the petitioner failed to demonstrate any refusal by the Magistrate or any legal compulsion for the Magistrate to act.
Questions settled- Is a Magistrate under a mandatory statutory obligation to record a statement under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 upon the request of any person?
- Can a writ of mandamus be issued to compel a Magistrate to record a statement under Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 without evidence of a formal refusal?
- Does the word 'may' in Section 164 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 impose a mandatory duty on a Magistrate to record a statement?
- Mst. Shehnaz Bibi vs Muhammad Akram and others1995 P Cr. L J 307 · Lahore High Court · 1994-10-10Read full judgment →
Summary & questions settled
This matter came before the Lahore High Court through a habeas corpus petition filed under Section 491 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 by the petitioner mother, seeking the custody of her minor female child who was allegedly forcibly snatched by her divorced husband. The respondent husband relied on an affidavit of compromise purportedly executed by the petitioner surrendering the child's custody pursuant to a Panchayat decision. The petitioner vehemently repudiated the document under oath. The core legal question revolved around the validity and enforceability of a private compromise or agreement executed by an illiterate woman relinquishing the custody of a suckling infant. The Court held that an agreement by a female relinquishing custody that appears unconscionable on its face raises a rebuttable presumption of coercion and undue influence, and that the custody of minors cannot be settled by private compromise. The habeas corpus petition was consequently accepted and the custody of the minor was restored to the mother, subject to any future remedies before the Guardian Judge.
Questions settled- Whether the custody of a minor can be settled by private compromise or arbitration?
- What is the legal presumption regarding an agreement entered into by a female that appears unconscionable on its face?
- Is a mother entitled to the habeas corpus custody of her suckling infant when an alleged relinquishment agreement is repudiated under oath?
- Mst. Shehnaz Bibi vs Muhammad Akram And OtherK.L.R. 1995 Criminal Cases 337 · Lahore High Court · 1994-10-10Read full judgment →
- Mst. Shazia Nasim vs Additional District Judge and others1995 MLD 981 · Lahore High Court · 1994-12-06Read full judgment →
- Mst. Shazia Nasim vs Additional District Judge And Other1995 MLD 981 · Lahore High Court · 1994-12-06Read full judgment →
- Mst. Shazia Anjum vs Government of Punjab through Secretary Health1995 CLC 1511 · Lahore High Court · 1995-04-02Read full judgment →