' This is an application under section 561-A, Cr. P. C. Directed against the proceedings of a criminal case under section 406, P. P. C. Sent up by the police against the petitioner.
2. The facts are that the petitioner was married to respondent No, 2, Hajiani Sher Bano on 11-6-1972.
A son was born out of the wedlock. The petitioner/husband, it is alleged, took the gold ornaments from his wife and pledged them with National Bank of Pakistan, Jodia Bazar Branch for obtaining a loan. It is said that he wanted this loan for the purpose of buying a shop. However, after the ornaments were taken from the wife she was sent away from the house and a written divorce was despatched to her. The matter was taken before the Jamaat and it was decided that the petitioner should return the jewellery articles to his divorced wife and also pay her Rs, 500 as Iddat expenses and Rs, 60 p.m. Towards maintenance of the minor child, but the petitioner did not abide by the directions given in the award.
3. It has been alleged that the petitioner redeemed the jewellery articles and misappropriated them. Respondent Sher Bano felt helpless but after the promulgation of Martial Law she made a petition to the Martial Law Administrator, Zone C, who forwarded the same to the concerned police.
Petitioner was then sent up for offence under section 406, P. P. C. And his house was searched.
Certain household articles were recovered as part of the dowry but the gold articles could not be found.
4. It has first been argued. By Mr. M. I. Memon on behalf of the petitioner that since special law dealing with such matters was enacted, namely, the West Pakistan Dowry (Prohibition on Display)
Act, 1967 the general law would not be applicable to this case. However, the special law deals with entirely different aspect of the matter. Under section 4 of the said Act where dowry articles and presents are received by any person other than the woman, at the time of her marriage, then they shall be transferred to the woman within one year after the date of marriage. The contravention is punishable under subsection (3) of section 4 and it is provided that the complaint should be made within one month from the date of the offence. It is not the allegation in the present case that the dowry articles were received by the husband and they were not returned to the wife within one year of the marriage. It has on the other hand been stated that the dowry articles were taken from the wife about 2 years after the marriage for being pledged with the bank. These ornaments were afterwards got redeemed and misappropriated. Meanwhile the woman was sent a written divorce.
5. Mr. M. I. Memon has referred to a decision of this Court reported in 1975 P Cr. L J 1217. The facts of that case were entirely different as there was nothing to show that the property or the subject- matter of the dowry had been entrusted to the accused. In the present case, however, there is even an admission by the National Bank that the ornaments were pledged by petitioner Haji Moosa but he had taken delivery of these ornaments after making full payment of the bank's dues. The date of delivery has not been mentioned in letter but presumably it was after the woman had been sent away. Under these circumstances whether there was any entrustment and misappropriation would be questions which could be decided by the trial Court on evidence. It cannot, therefore, be said that no offence appears to have been committed on the face of the proceedings and the proceedings are being continued for the purpose of harassment of the petitioner. Under these circumstances no ground has been made out for interference at this stage.
The petition is accordingly dismissed.