Through instant petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, petitioner Asia Bibi has prayed for quashing of case FIR No.180/19 dated 27.03.2019, in respect of offence under Section 420, 468 & 471 PPC, registered at Police Station, Zahir Peer District Rahim Yar Khan.
2. Briefly , the allegation contained in the impugned FIR is that the petitioner , ex-wife of respondent No.3/complainant, in connivance with her co-accused committed forgery/tempering in column No.14 of her Pert of Nikahnama while mentioning an amount of Rs.43,90,000/-, which was not incorporated in the original Nikahnama .
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned FIR is based on false, frivolous and concocted story; that the matter had earlier been thrashed out by the Anti-Corruption Establishment wherein the same was dropped twice on 12.05.2018 and 01.01.2020 having been found false during inquiry; that the impugned FIR had earlier been canceled by the local police and in consequence thereto, vide order dated 23.04.2019 the petitioner withdrew her writ petition filed before this Court seeking the selfsame relief; that subsequently , the District Police Officer forwarded the matter to the Anti-Corruption Establishment where the judicial action was recommended; that the suit filed by the petitioner for recovery of the dower has already been decreed in her favour and the factum of alleged forgery in the Nikahnama had never been agitated by the complain ant before the learned Family Court in his written statement/pleadings; that no forensic report qua the alleged forgery has been brought on record; that it was purely a family dispute and the impugned FIR has been got lodged in order to convert the same into criminal one just to blackmail, harass and causing financial loss to the petitioner .
4. On the other hand, learned Law Officer assisted by learned counsel for respondent No.3/complainant submitted that the petitioner alongwith her co-acc used namely , Qazi Muhammad Rashid, Nikah Registrar , Muhammad Hashim, Secretary Union Council, being the public servants and others, have made forgery in column No.14 of the Nikahnama dated 07.07.201 1 and mentioned the additional amount of Rs.43,90,000/- therein, which was not available in other three perts of Nikahnama ; that during investigation, the investigating officer has found the petitioner fully involved in this occurrence with the recommendation of judicial action against the accused persons, which was also approved by the Regional Director ACE, Bahawalpur; that if the petitioner feels dissatisfied with the investigation being conducted, she may approach the higher forum for the change of investigation; that no occasion arises for this Court to intervene in the matter in its Constitutional jurisdiction.
5. Arguments heard. Record perused.
6. It is an admitted fact that three Baigha/12 kanal land, three tola gold ornament s and a house consisting of two rooms and four walls was fixed as dower of the petitioner . No doubt in column No.1 4 of Pert of Nikahnama held by the petitioner the value of dower has been incorporated as Rs.43,90,000/- which did not find mentioned in other three Perts of Nikahnama but the question which requires determination is as to whether the petitioner has incorporated the said amount while keeping respondent No.3/ complainant in darkness or the same was very much in his knowledge. Record evinces that the petitioner filed a suit for recovery of dower and maintenance allowance against respondent No.3/ complainant on 27.07.2016 i.e. much prior to the registration of impugned FIR, on the basis of alleged tempered Nikahnama. Respondent No.3/ complainant filed written statement in the said suit and nowhere he took the plea that the amou nt mentioned in the said Nikahnama was a result of fraud and forgery rather his entire defence was that the amount of dower has already been paid. The said suit was decreed by the learned Judge Family Court vide judgment and decree dated 03.10.2017. Respondent No.3/complainant preferred appeal against the said judgment and decree, which was dismissed by the learned Appellate Court vide judgment and decree dated 28.04.2018. After exha usting all the available forums when respondent No.3/ complainant could not succeed to establish his claim qua payment of dower , he came up with the plea of tempering in the alleged Nikahnama for the first time on 27.03.2019. It is also important to note that in two successive round of investigations, the Deputy Director (Investigation) Anti-Corruption Establishment, District R.Y. Khan, recommended droppage of the proceedings vide report on 12.05.2018 and 01.01.2020 but strangely in the revised final report judicial action was recommend against the petitioner and others without giving any cogent reasons of difference of first opinion. It is an admitted fact that respondent No.3/complainant has not paid the decretal amount and due to that default the Executing Court has also sent him to the civil prison. Apparently , respondent No.3/ complainant as a counter blast tried to book his rival party in the criminal case.
7. Even if for the sake of arguments, it is assumed that the petitioner has incorporated the value of settled dower in column No.14 of the alleged Nikahnama, even then no offence is made out, in particular when the dower is not disputed one. It is well established law that in order to constitute an offence mens rea of an accused is necessary which is patently missing in the instant case. In no manner , it can be said that while committing such forgery the petitioner could obtain any undue benefit other than the admitted dower between the parties. Apparently , respondent No.3/ complainant in order to subdue his rival party tried to book them in a criminal case while concocting a false and frivolous story .
8. For what has been discussed above, this writ petition is allowed and consequently impugned FIR No.180/19 dated 27.03.2019, in respect of offence under Section 420, 468 & 471 PPC, registered at Police Station, Zahir Peer District Rahim Yar Khan stands quashed.
9. Before parting with this order , it is important to note that it was purely a family dispute between the parties and respondent No.3/complainant in order to settle his score tried to rope his ex-wife in a criminal case and unfortunately the Anti Corruption Establishment was playing in his hands. It is a matter of grave concern that the Regional Director , ACE, Bahawalpur , while according approval of judicial action has failed to apply his independent mind and granted approval in a cursory manner , which is unwarranted under the law. Anti Corruption Establishment should avoid to poke its nose in such a typical nature of family disputes and utilize its energy in the cases, which fall in its domain and require immediate action. Director General, (ACE) is directed to warn his subordinates to avoid unnecessary intrusion in family disputes, unless the same is specifically assigned to them by the court having the competence over the issue.