M. TABASSUM AFTAB ALVI, C J.---The captioned application has been filed for quashment of the impugned FIR No,61 of 2017, dated 28.6.2017 registered against applicants at Police Station, Islamgarh, upon the application of Muhammad Waseem, complainant, in offences under sections 10,11,16 and 19, ZHA. It is averred in the application that a frivolous and concocted F.I.R. has been registered against applicants. It is further claimed that applicant No,1, is an adult lady and she with her free-will contracted 'Nikah' with Aziz Subhani, applicant No,2; therefore, craved that by accepting the instant application, the aforesaid FIR. may be quashed.
2. The application was resisted by S.H.O Islamgarh through objections, which were also treated as objections of other official respondents, as well as, by private respondent, duly filed on 02.07.2017, wherein, it is stated that applicant No,1, was abducted by other applicants, who is likely to be recovered from them and investigating agency ought to be given reasonable time to interrogate the matter; hence prayed that by accepting objections, quashment application may be dismissed.
3.Mr. Muhammad Saeed Awan, the learned Counsel for applicants, submitted with vehemence that applicant No,1, being a sui juris lady contracted 'Nikah' with applicant No,2, as per her free consent, on 26.06.2017; however, complainant, who is brother of applicant No,1, got registered a frivolous case against applicants; therefore, by accepting the instant application the impugned FIR No,61/2017, dated 28.06.2017, may be quashed to secure the ends of justice.
4.Conversely, Mr. Mushtaq Ahmad Janjua, the learned Counsel for complainant-respondent No,2, contended that before submission of challan an FIR cannot be quashed by this Court under section 561-A, Cr.P.C, rather after submission of challan, the same may be set-atnaught therefore, the instant application is premature, He stressed on the point that the case is yet to be investigated by police; therefore, application supra for quashment of FIR may be dismissed.
5.I have heard the learned Advocates for applicants as well as contesting private respondent and gone through the record with utmost care.
6.The matter in hand pertains to quashment of FIR No,61/2017, dated 28.06.2017, registered against applicants at Police Station, Islamgarh, upon the application of Muhammad Waseem, complainant, in offences under sections 10, 11, 16 and 19, ZHA.
7.At the very outset, I would like to take up argument of the learned Counsel for private respondent No,2, that an F.I.R. cannot be quashed by this Court under section 561-A,Cr.P.C, rather after submission of challan, the same may be set-at-naught; therefore the instant application is premature. For having true perception, section 561-A, Cr.P.C, is reproduced as under:- <i><b>"561-A. Saving of inherent power of High</i></b> Court.--Nothing in this Code shall be deemed to limit or affect the inherent power of the High Court to make such orders as may be necessary to give effect to any order under this Code, or to prevent abuse of the process of any Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice."
8. A reading of the above provisions of section 561-A, Cr.P.C, 1898, reveals that this Court has inherent power to make such orders as may be necessary to give effect to any order under this Code or to prevent abuse of process of any Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. These powers are very wide and can be exercised by the High Court at any time. In exceptional cases this Court can exercise its powers under section 561-A, without waiting for trial Court to pass orders under sections 249-A or 265-K, Cr.P.C, 1898. If the facts of the case so warrant to secure the ends of justice. The words "or otherwise to secure the ends of justice" clearly empowers this Court to exercise its inherent powers available under section 561-A, at any stage to do complete justice.
Even otherwise, it is well settled principle of law in such like cases that if free hand to the police to play havoc with the life, honour and liberty of citizens and to use it as a lever to commit atrocities on innocent citizens under the garb of investigation, is allowed to apply, then jurisdiction of the High Court would become redundant and citizens would be left at the mercy of police. The aforesaid view is fortified from a case reported as Mst. Kaneez Fatima and others v. The State and others (1995 PCr.LJ 1672).
9.It would not be out of palace to observe here that ordinarily this Court does not interfere in the investigation of a criminal case; however, if the Court comes to a conclusion that accused is innocent and his/her conviction is impossible, then this Court is duty bound to quash the criminal proceedings. The aforesaid view stands fortified from a case reported as Allah Ditta and 3 others v.
The State and 3 others [1995 PCr.LJ (Lahore) 1668], wherein, it was opined as under:- <i>"The contention of the learned Counsel indeed carries weight as ordinarily the High Court does not interfere in the investigation of a criminal case to obstruct or divert the ordinarily course of criminal procedure if it comes to the view that a prima facie case is disclosed but where the Court comes to a clear conclusion without any manner of doubt that the accused persons are innocent and for that in any view of the matter their conviction is quite impossible it is duty bound to quash the criminal proceedings in accordance with law,"</i> Applicant No,1, Mst. Amina Bibi, personally appeared in this Court and deposed at Bar that she being sui-juris contracted marriage as per her free-will, to Aziz Subhani, applicant No,2, and nobody abducted her. Moreover, she affirmed ingredients of 'Nikahnama' dated 26.06.2017 and categorically admitted her 'Nikah' as valid. Therefore, in such like situation when applicant No,1, has admitted her 'Nikah', hence, it has become crystal clear that allegation of her abduction is baseless. The statement of a woman, in such like cases, is of vital importance to decide the controversy between the parties. Moreover, according to the Injunctions of Islam, the consent of adult sane couple is sufficient for 'Nikah'. The applicants Nos,1 and 2 being sui-juris have lawfully married to each other and in these circumstances the alleged offences in FIR are not made out and continuance of proceedings under the circumstances against the spouses and others may amount to unnecessary harassm ent. My aforesaid view finds support from an unreported judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir titled Syed Azad Hussain Shah v. Syeda Saba Asghar and others (Civil P.L.A. No,86 of 2012) decided on 19.6.2012. The apex Court in the identical given case has not granted leave to appeal against an order of the High Court dated 23.4.2012, through which FIR No,124 was quashed. In this regard, the relevant portion of the judgment supra is reproduced as under:-- <i>"Moreover, the statement of Mst. Saba Asghar, respondent No,1, which is a most relevant evidence in this Court, have categorically stated that she entered into Nikah with the deceased on her own will and no one has abducted her. In the presence of the said statement, no further evidence is required in this Court. The marriage is a civil contract and every Muslim of sound mind, who has attained puberty, can enter into contract of marriage and it is void only when it is solemnized without his/her consent. According to principle of Muhammadan Law the presumption of valid marriage can be ascertained from the fact of acknowledgement by a man or woman as husband and wife.</i>
11. It is well established principle of law that each and every case has its own peculiar facts and circumstances, hence, it should be judged in light of its peculiar facts. As discussed above applicant No,1, has categorically admitted her 'Nikah' with applicant No,2; therefore, their Nikah dated 26.06.2017. is declared valid and proceedings initiated against applicants through the impugned FIR are accordingly liable to be quashed.
12. The crux of above discussion is that I accept the instant quashment application and F.I.R.
No,61/2017 dated 28.06.2017, registered at Police Station, Islamgarh, against applicants, on the complaint of Muhammad Waseem, complainant, in offences under sections 10, 11, 16 and 19,ZHA, stands quashed.