1. ' BHAJIN DAS TEJWANI, J.--- This application has been preferred under section 561-A, Cr.P.C. For quashment of the F.I.R. In Crime No,436 of 2009 under sections 344, 380, 504/34, P.P.C., read with section 14 of the Hudood Ordinance lodged with Police Station Khairpur Nathan Shah, District Dadu on 19-10-2009 by one Manzoor Ali Khokhar.
2. ' The allegations in F.I.R. Are that the complainant was married with sister of the applicant, namely, Mst. Farzana and during such wedlock she has three children. The present applicant is alleged to have been pursuing for Talaq to his sister.
3. ' On the day of incident i,e, on 6-9-2009 it is alleged that present applicant along with Adnan and another unknown, in two Toyota Corolla cars, having weapons, entered in the house of the complainant and after breaking the door of the cupboard has stolen jewelry and cash and forcibly took away his wife and children, as they were not available at the house.
4. ' The F.I.R. Was lodged after getting order from the 1st Additional Sessions Judge Dadu. During this period the Challan of the case has been submitted and now it is pending as Criminal Case No,439 of 2009 with learned 1st Judicial Magistrate, Khairpur Nathan Shah.
5. ' I have heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for the complainant, learned A.P.G.
6. And Investigating Officer.
7. ' Learned counsel for the appellant at the first outset referred another F.I.R. For kidnapping, lodged by the complainant Manzoor Ali Khokhar in Crime No,539 of 2009 on 20-12-2009 but the same was disposed of in "C" Class by order dated 18-1-2010 by the learned II Judicial Magistrate, Dadu.
8. ' Learned counsel states that admittedly there is matrimonial dispute between the parties and the present applicant is brother of the wife of complainant, who had divorced his wife Mst. Farzana and in order to settle such matrimonial dispute the F.I.R. In the matter was lodged and thereafter two other F.I.Rs, were also lodged in order to humiliate the applicant and his family and according to him the proceedings arising out of such F.I.R. Is abuse of the process of Court, therefore, the same may be quashed.
9. ' Mr. Ali Gohar Soomro, Advocate, appearing for the complainant, has referred me the prayer clause in which the applicant has prayed for quashment of F.I.R. And according to learned counsel since Challan has been submitted, therefore, the present application cannot be maintained and the applicant has to prefer another application for quashment of the proceedings. He further confirms that during this period Mst. Farzana has been divorced by the complainant.
10. ' The Investigating Officer present in the Court states that according to his report other two F.I.Rs, lodged by the same complainant against the present applicant and others to settle the matrimonial dispute, have been disposed of in "C" Class, while this case was investigated by him and since the accused/applicant side is residing at Karachi did not come forward, therefore, this case was challaned. He has also admitted that this case may be the result of matrimonial dispute and rivalry between the parties.
11. ' The learned A.P.-G. Appearing for the State, states that on the basis of evidence, case has been challaned but he admits that there is matrimonial dispute as the wife of the complainant along with her children has proceeded with his brother.
12. ' So far the technical objection of learned counsel for the complainant is concerned that the applicant is not entitled for quashment of proceedings on the score that he has sought quashment of F.I.R. And case has been challaned therefore the applicant has to prefer another application for quashment of the proceedings. The contention of the learned counsel cannot be accepted that on such technical score, the litigant cannot be non-suited, in case on merits he is entitled for the relief.
13. The provisions of section 561-A, Cr.P.C. Gives inherent jurisdiction to this Court to pass any order to secure the ends of justice and prevent the abuse of process of the Court. Therefore, even this Court can take notice of subsequent events or progress of the matter that if the proceedings based on same F.I.R., are abuse of the A process of the Court, the same discretion can be exercised by avoiding technicality.
14. ' Admittedly, there was matrimonial dispute between the parties during which the complainant has also divorced her wife, who has gone to her parents along with children with present applicant, who is brother of the wife of the complainant, namely, Mst. Farzana.##TE# Moreover, two other F.I.Rs, lodged in similar manner against the applicant and others were not proved and were found false and were disposed of in "C" Class, therefore, it is hardly believable that applicant will commit dacoity or robbery in the house of his sister.
15. The complainant has resorted to set the criminal law into motion to settle the civil and matrimonial dispute during which he has divorced his wife Mst. Farzana, therefore, the proceedings initiated against the applicant is nothing but an annoyance of complainant to humiliate the family of his in- laws and as such the proceedings pending against the applicant before the learned trial Court are abuse of the process of Court and not sustainable.
16. ' For the foregoing reasons, the proceedings pending before the learned trial Court were quashed by me on 22-4-2010.##TE#