Pakistan Case Lawโ† Search
1973 SCMR 135

MUHAMMAD HAFEEZ CHUGHTAI vs THE STATE AND Another

Citation1973 SCMR 135
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Criminal Miscellaneous No. 1548 of 1968 Petition for Special Leave to
Judge(s)Waheeduddin Ahmad, Sajjad Ahmad Jan
ResultPetition dismissed

1. SAJJAD AHMAD, J.-A complaint' was filed against the petitioner .By the Chairman, Union Committee, Ward No. 56, Lahore, on the complaint of the petitioner's wife, Mst. Shamim Akhtar.

2. Under section 6 of the Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1961, for having allegedly contracted a second marriage with one Mst. Naheed Akhtar at Rawalpindi, without seeking the previous permission of the Arbitration Council. The complaint was marked for disposal to the Ilaqa Magistrate by the Deputy Commissioner, Lahore. The petitioner appeared before the Magistrate and objected to his jurisdiction to try the case, on the ground that he had no jurisdiction to try the case as the offence had been committed in Rawalpindi and not in Lahore within his territorial jurisdiction. This application was rejected. The petitioner then moved the High Court under section 561-A, Cr. P. C., praying for quashment of the proceedings on the ground of lack of jurisdiction on the part of the Lahore Magistrate to try this case. The learned Single Judge in the High Court has accepted this part of the petitioner's prayer, but has directed that the complaint shall be forwarded to the competent Magistrate for disposal at Rawal--pindi. The petitioner being aggrieved by this part of the order has come up for special leave to appeal.

3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the complaint itself having been incompetently instituted, it should have been treated as a dead letter and not forwarded to the Rawalpindi jurisdiction. We do not agree. The High Court has ample powers to transfer any case pending at one place to an other place within its jurisdiction, and the fact of instituting a complaint in wrong jurisdiction does not mean the end of a complaint. We think that no exception can be taken to the order of the High Court. If, however, the petitioner has any objection to the in- competency of the complaint on any ground, the same can be urged by him before the trial Magistrate, who will decide the objection according to law.

4. This petition is dismissed.

For educational and research use only โ€” not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.
DisclaimerยทPrivacyยทTermsยทSearch