1. The case of the petitioner is that he is Dental Surgeon, and is Diploma Holder from Pakistan Dental Institute School of Mechanical Dentisty, Lahore. He has been running a Dental Clinic since 1954 and has a vast experience in this filed. His real son Atiq-ur-Rehman is also foreign qualified from Germany in Dental Surgery and is holding a certificate issued by Institute of City Bermen, Germany and at present the petitioner and his son both are running the Dental Clinic under the name and style of Aslam Dental Clinic at Masjid Bazar, Jaranwala. During this whole period of 42 years there is no complaint whosoever against the petitioner regarding his profession from any quarter. One Mst.
2. Ibrar Hussain who had come to Pakistan from America, sister of the respondent No,3 came at the clinic of the petitioner on 21-6-1996 for getting her teeth check up. The petitioner checked up her teeth and directed her to come on the next day. She again came at the clinic of the petitioner on the next, day and she was given proper treatment. After a lapse of about 4 months she again visited the clinic of the petitioner for re-checking and after check up she was satisfied and went away with a promise that she will pay balance fee/charges of Rs,900 for the said treatment to the petitioner within a week. But later on when she did not turn up for the payment of said amount the petitioner contacted her brother (respondent No,3) for the payment of said amount but he flatly refused to pay the said amount rather he demanded for the return of amount already received from his sister by the petitioner as his fee/charges for the treatment of the teeth of Mst. Naz Ibrar Hussain and threatened the petitioner to be ready for dire consequences. The respondent No,3 with mala fide intention, to harass, blackmail and extort money from the petitioner, with the active connivance of respondent No, 2 submitted an application to the District Magistrate on 26-10-1996, on behalf of his sister for issuance of direction to the Medical Superintendent, Civil Hospital, Jaranwala for checking up the teeth of his sister Naz Ibrar Hussain. The said application was marked to the M.S. Tehsil Headquarter Hospital for Medical Examination. The sister of the respondent No,3 was medically examined by the respondent No,2 on 29-10-1996 and the abovesaid lady obtained a false and fabricated Medico Legal Report from the respondent No,2 in her favour and against the petitioner. On the basis of said Medico Legal Report the respondent No,3 lodged an F.I.R. No,1024 dated 31-10-1996 under section 336, P.P.C. against the petitioner, his son Attiq-ur-Rehman and Salah-ud-Din, Assistant of the petitioner.
2. Report and Parawise comments were called for from the S.H.O. respondent No,1 on 20-1-1997 so as to reach this Court within ten days and some law officer who also to appear and assist the Court. Again in C.M. No, 3 of 1997 it was ordered that office should inquire from the respondent S.H.O. as to why the Report and Parawise comments were not submitted as ordered by this Court. Today again neither any one has appeared nor any report and parawise comments have been filed. by respondent No,1, for which issue notice of contempt of Court against the S.H.O. respondent No,1 separately.
3. 3.The first submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner had given treatment to the sister of respondent No,3 on 22-6-1996 and the F.I.R. was lodged on 31-10-1996 without explaining the delay of four months and .that even from the contents of the F.I.R. no offence is made out under section 336, P.P.C. in view of section 88, Cr.P.C. He has further submitted that respondent No,3 and his sister had come to the clinic of the petitioner who was fully qualified to treat the petitioner and that she was so treated on payment of fee of Rs,500 and when again she appeared further treatment was given with her consent and that Rs,900 were due towards her that this false case was concocted against the petitioner. Section 88 of the Code of Criminal Procedure reads as under:-- "88. Nothing which is not intended to cause death, is an offence by reason of any harm which it may cause, or be intended by the doer to cause, or be known by the door to be likely to cause, to any person for whosd benefit. it is done in good faith, and who has given a consent, whether express or implied, to suffer that harm or to take the risk of that harm.
4. Illustration A, a surgeon, knowing that a particular operation is likely to cause the death of Z, who suffers under the painful complaint, but not intending to cause Z's death, and intending in good faith Z's benefit, performs that operation on Z, with Z's consent, A has committed no offence.
5. 4.In the present case also, the petitioner is qualified from Pakistan Dental Institute, School of Mechanical Dentistry, Lahore vide certificate No, 154 dated 8-1-1954 and also holds a degree of Bachelor of Homoepathic Medicine and declared competent to practice in Homoepathic medicine and surgery. As such, the act done by the petitioner was not intended to cause death and having been done by consent in good faith for the benefit of the sister of respondent No,3 makes out no offence. The repeated visit of the sister of respondent No,3 to the clinic is sufficient to show the consent of the petitioner.
6. 5.In this view of the matter, the F.I.R. No,1024 dated 31-10-1996 registered at Police Station Jaranwala District Faisalabad for an offence under section 336, P.P.C. is illegal and quashed. The writ petition is disposed of accordingly. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.