' Contends that the petitioner is father of Mst. Shamim Akhtar alias Shamim who was married to Jamshed Ali on 18-3-1994. Respondent No,3 namely Mehar Nazir Ahmad is the father of aforesaid Jamshed Ali. The aforesaid Jamshed Ali and Shamim Akhtar resided in the house of Mehar Nazir Ahmad respondent No,3 and performed marital obligations. Jamshed Ali was injured during a fight with his father i,e, respondent No,3 after about six months of his marriage. He was hospitalised and ultimately expired about four months ago. His wife Mst. Shamim continued residing in the house of father of her deceased husband i,e, her father-in-law. She was not allowed to meet any relative on the pretext that she was in the period of Iddat. The neighbours of her father-in-law intimated the relatives of Shamim that she was being subjected to sexual intercourse by her father-in-law as a result of which she had got pregnant. The petitioner returned from Saudi Arabia and after getting to know about the above facts, approached respondent No,2 i,e, S.H.O., Police Station City Burewala, District Vehari for the registration of case but in vain. He, thereupon, made a complaint before the S.P., Vehari but that complaint remained unfruitful.
2. In this petition, it is contended that since the aforesaid officials i,e, respondents Nos.1 and 2 have failed to perform their duties to entertain the complaint of the petitioner and to register a case as required by section 154, Cr.P.C., therefore, they may be directed to proceed in accordance with law and register a case against respondent No,3 as the latter had been committing Zinabil-Jabr with Shamim Akhtar aforesaid.
3. I have considered the foregoing facts and find that though there is an assertion in the petition that the petitioner had approached the S.H.O. Yet there is nothing on record to show that in fact, the petitioner had appeared before the S.H.O. Concerned to lodge the report. There is a photo copy of the petition addressed to the S.P., Vehari but it is undated and as such, does not disclose as to when the same was sent to the S.P., Vehari. In fact, it is Shamim Akhtar who was the alleged victim of Zina-bil-Jabr but she has been kept back for the reasons, best known to the petitioner. Even otherwise, an equally efficacious and effective remedy is available to the petitioner or to the victim under section 190, Cr.P.C. To lodge a complaint before the Illaqa Magistrate regarding the alleged occurrence. The Magistrate taking cognizance of the case would have ample authority to direct an enquiry including the power to direct the police to conduct investigation in the matter. As such, the petitioner cannot avail the Constitutional jurisdiction of this Court at this stage. The petition is accordingly dismissed in limine.