' TARIQ SHAMIM, J.--- Through this petition, the petitioner seeks quashment of F.I.R. No,251, dated 29- 10-2004 for offences under sections 16, MPO, 123-A, 124-A, 147, 148, 188, P.P.C. And section 7 of the Anti-Terrorism Act registered at Police Station Lohari Gate, Lahore.
2. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner along with 18 other persons was arrested by the complainant Javaid Iqbal, S.-I./S.H.O. Police Station Lohari Gate for taking out a procession in violation of the ban imposed by the Government in the said respect.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the F.I.R. Was totally false and frivolous and based on mala fide intention of the complainant; that the offence under section 124-A was a non- cognizable offence and F.I.R. In respect thereof could not be registered or investigated without prior permission of the Magistrate; that section 7 of Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997, which was subsequently added, does not attract to the facts of the case; that similarly section 16, MPO was also not attracted to the case of the petitioner and lastly contended that there was no material against the petitioner as per the F.I.R. Regarding the aforesaid allegations.
4. On the other hand the learned Assistant Advocate-General and the learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent No,1/complainant argued that the petitioner along with others was arrested at the spot while participating in an illegal procession; that the offences mentioned in the F.I.R. Were fully attracted to the case of the petitioner who was nominated therein and had actively participated in the said occurrence; that after thorough investigation the petitioner was found to be fully involved in the crime mentioned in the F.I.R. And that since the challan had been filed in the trial Court as such the writ petition was not maintainable.
5. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record. The petitioner is nominated in the F.I.R. And serious allegations have been levelled against him and others in the F.I.R. Which have been denied by the petitioner, thus, the controversy essentially pertains to disputed questions of fact which exercise cannot be undertaken while exercising constitutional jurisdiction of this Court. It would be appropriate to refer to the latest pronouncement by the Honourable Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of Col. Shah Sadiq v. Muhammad Ashiq and others 2006 SCM R 276 wherein it has been observed by the Honourable apex Court that the High Court in its constitutional jurisdiction cannot resolve disputed questions of fact and that the ordinary course of trial before the Court should not be allowed to be deflected.
6. During the course of arguments it has transpired that the application of the petitioner filed under section 265-K, Cr.P.C. As well as under section 23 of the Anti-Terrorism Act seeking transfer of case to a regular Court are pending adjudication before the learned trial Court as such the prayer made by the petitioner for quashment of the F.I.R. Has become redundant.
7 .For what has been discussed above, the petition being without any force is dismissed.