1. Learned counsel for the petitioners has produced a copy of the statement of Petitioner No, 2 recorded before the Civil Judge & Judicial Magistrate-VI, Karachi South.
2. Learned APG has also produced copies of the documents which contain nikahnama allegedly performed between Muhammad Asad and. Selma Bibi (Petitioner No 2) on 22.02.2009 alongwith verification letter issued by the Nazim of Union Council Baroot, Tehsil Hub, Dist. Lasbella in which it has been stated that nikah was performed on 22.2.2009 which was registered with Union Council on 8.7.2009.
3. This petition has been filed for quashment of FIR No, 245/2009 registered on 14.7.2009 at Police Station Clifton, Karachi, under Section 496-A/34, PPC at the instance of Respondent No, 3, who is father of Petitioner No, 2.
4. The allegations in the above-referred FIR are that the Petitioner No, 1 and others have kidnapped the Petitioner No, 2 with intention to commit zina with her.
5. The Petitioner No, 2 was produced before the Judicial Magistrate-VI, Karachi South, where her statement was recorded in which she has stated that on 11.4.2009 she with her free-will has married with Imran Bhatti (Petitioner No, 1) and she is not aware about her any previous marriage.
6. She has further stated in her statement that her father is extending threats to the family of the Petitioner No,
1. She has also stated that she is adult and can marry with her own free-will and no one has committed any wrong with her.
7. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that in view of the statement of Petitioner No, 2, who is a star witness in the matter there is no probability of conviction of the accused persons and no purpose will be served by keeping this FIR pending and the pendency of the FIR would amount to abuse of process of the Court.
8. Learned counsel for the complainant/Respondent No, 3 states that the Petitioner No, 2 has performed nikah upon nikah and she has committed an offence and at this stage, quashment of the FIR is not proper.
9. Learned APG while adopting the submission of the learned counsel for Respondent No, 3 has submitted that till to-date the investigation is not completed and in case FIR is quashed the Investigating Officer could not complete the investigation. He then submits that the Investigating Officer is enquiring into the offence of performing nikah upon nikah, therefore, requires further time.
10. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record of this case made available before us.
11. From the perusal of documents submitted by the learned APG it appears that first nikah was allegedly performed on 22.2.2009 and the same was registered with Union Council on 8.7.2009 after about four months of the alleged date of nikah without any plausible reason and the FIR registered on 14.7 2009. We do not want to give any finding upon authenticity of the nikah, but certainly the same was got registered as an after thought after the nikah performed between Petitioners No, 1 and 2 on 11.4.2009 registered on 13.4.2009. The case was registered against the Petitioner No, 1 and his other family members under Section 496-A/34, PPC and after the statement of Petitioner No, 2 before the Judicial Magistrate it is clear that the said Petitioner No, 2 was never kidnapped and a false FIR was got registered by the father of Petitioner No, 2.
12. It is now well-settled principle of law that the powers can be exercised to prevent the abuse of process of Court in order to promote the ends of justice. The High Court can quash FIR where the complaint is frivolous and does not contain any definite accusation and apparently where no offence is made out and there is no probability of conviction of the accused person.
13. In the instant case, after the statement of Petitioner No, 2 it is clear that she was not kidnapped and has freely performed her nikah with Petitioner No, 1, therefore, the FIR appears to be false and there is no probability of conviction of the accused person.
14. In view of the statement of Petitioner No, 2, there is no probability of conviction of the accused persons and keeping FTR pending , would amounts to abuse of process of the Court, hence this petition is allowed. FIR No, 245/2009 of Police Station Clifton, Karachi stands quashed.
15. This petition is disposed of accordingly