' A deserted woman, with the name and frame of the petitioner, who felt to have been overstepped; and bypassed by another woman, taken into fold by her husband,. Instituted a suit for dissolution of marriage on 31-1-2004 to get the contract of hateful union annulled, through the exercise of right granted to her under section 2 of the Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act of 1939, in the Court of learned Judge Family Court, Ahmadpur East. After about three months from the filing of the above mentioned suit, in F.I.R. No.118 of 2004, dated 1-4-2004, under section 16 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance VII of 1979 and under section 109 of the P.P.C., was got registered by Ghulam Qasim son of Imam Bakhah with the Police of Uch Sharif Police Station, Tehsil Ahmadpur East, District Bahawalpur.
2. The facts, in brief, are the petitioner, whose marriage was performed with Ghulam Qasim, informant 9/10 years ago was happily residing in the house of aforesaid Ghulam Qasim when a daughter was born to her but she could not survive. Thereafter no other issue was born. But after a few years of marriage, aforesaid Ghulam Qasim contracted a second marriage with Mst. Mumtaz Bibi daughter of Hazoor Bakhsh, allegedly in contravention of the Muslim Family Law Ordinance, 1961. Due to this marriage, the relations between the parties became constrained and Mst. Nazir Bibi decided to file a suit for dissolution of marriage, which was instituted by her as narrated above.
After the passage of about three months the abovementioned F.I.R. Was lodged by Ghulam Qasim, her husband, levelling the allegation of abduction against Riaz Ahmad and others. The investigation of the police commenced after the registration of the F.I.R. And during the investigation of the statement of Mst. Nazir Bibi was recorded by the Investigating Officer on 15-4- 2004 in Darul Aman, where she was residing at that time, in which she categorically stated that no one had abducted her and she had filed the suit for dissolution of marriage in the Court of learned Judge Family Court, Ahmedpur East with her own freewill. Upon this statement of Mst. Nazir Bibi, the Investigating Officer moved the learned Illaqa Magistrate for cancellation of the case. The learned Illaqa Magistrate, instead of approving the cancellation report, summoned Mst. Nazir Bibi and directed the Investigating Officer toproduce her before him on 20th of April, 2004. She appeared, reiterated and verified her earlier statement, recorded by the police before the aforesaid learned Magistrate also on 20-4-2004. After the recording of the statement of the aforesaid lady, the learned Magistrate directed the Investigating Officer to act strictly in accordance with law. After the statement of Mst. Nazir Bibi was recorded on 15-4-2004 by the Investigating Officer, he thereafter found that all the accused were innocent, so he decided to move the learned Magistrate for the cancellation of case on 19-4-2004. From 20-4-2004, the file of police has shown no progress uptill 26-4-2004. Thereafter an application was moved by Ghulam Qasim on 24-4-2004 before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Ahmedpur East in which the informant had complained that the Investigating Officer was not recording the statement of his witnesses. Upon this, the aforesaid Magistrate directed the Investigating Officer to record statements of the witnesses of the informant. The statements of the witnesses of the informant were recorded. After this exercise, the Investigating Officer himself added section 10(2) of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood)
Ordinance VII of 1979 against the petitioner also.
3. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has forcefully asserted that Ghulam Qasim, the husband of petitioner was annoyed due to the filing of dissolution suit, but was infuriated when the petitioner had refused to get recorded the statement of her before the police and the learned Magistrate in accordance with his wishes and against those person, to whom the informant wanted to implicate. As the petitioner had refused to bow down to the wishes of the informant, so he initiated these mala fide proceedings against the petitioner with the connivance of the police. According to the learned counsel, not only the registration of the F.I.R. Yet the subsequent proceedings are based on wrong facts, which are the result of mala fides and have been started as a counter-blast to the exercise of right by the writ petitioner through her dissolution suit. So. The F.I.R. And the subsequent proceedings which are the abuse of the process of law may be quashed.
4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the informant and the State has replied that as the offence of section 10(2), Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance VII of 1979 has been added, so the writ petitioner being an accused should not be granted any assistance from this Court. It has further been pleaded that the writ petitioner having been involved in a heinous crime of having of illicit relations with Riaz Ahmad, so'the case may not be cancelled but be permitted to be proceeded against them.
5. I have considered the lengthy arguments of the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the parties and perused the police record alsocopies of few documents have also been obtained from the police record, which have been placed on the record of this case.
6. It is an admitted fact that writ petitioner had filed a suit for dissolution of marriage against Ghulam Qasim, informant on 31-1-2004 in the Court of learned Judge Family Court, Ahmedpur East.
This fact has also not been denied that Ghulam Qasim got another wife after a few years from the performance of 'nikah' with the writ petitioner. The allegation of abduction levelled against Riaz Ahmad and others in the F.I.R. Clearly depicts that at that stage, Ghulam Qasim, informant had intended to involve Riaz Ahmad and others only in the abduction case of Mst. Nazir Mai, and had no intention to entangle Mst. Nazir Bibi into the alleged affair of illicit relations. But Mst. Nazir Bibi when refused to bow her head to the dictates of Ghulam Qasim and refused to implicate the persons, whom Ghulam Qasim wanted to encompass into the alleged occurrence, he changed his face and proceeded to bring her in that vicious circle by levelling the allegations of fornication upon her, with the help, assistance and connivance of the police. I am astonished to note that as to why Ghulam Qasim had remained mum for about three months when Mst. Nazir Bibi had filed a suit for dissolution of marriage against him. Even after the registration of F.I.R., till the statement of Mst.
Nazir Bibi on 15-4-2004, no allegation of Zina was levelled against aforesaid Mst. Nazir Bibi by Ghulam Qasim, informant. Investigating Officer had earlier found all the accused innocent and had moved for cancellation of the case, which was to be presented before the competent Court on 19- 4-2004. But afterwards suddenly, on 26-4-2004, instead of preparing and presenting report of cancellation to the competent Court, he changed the stance without any material event and went on to record a supplementary statement of three persons namely Ghulam Qasim (informant) the statements of Ashiq Hussain and Abdul Razzaq to implicate and involve Mst. Nazir Bibi in the alleged offence of section 10(2) of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance VII of 1979. I have perused the statements of all these three witnesses also, which contain not only. The contradictory stand as was taken in the F.I.R. But has levelled only vague allegations of illicit relations against Mst. Nazir Bibi, without any particular event.
7. The facts and circumstances of the case, therefore, speak volume not only against the mala fide actions of the informant but of the police also. The writ petitioner who has gone to knock the door of Court to get the divorce from her husband who had deserted her and has taken another wife is now being subjected to illegal blackmailing tactics, duress and coercion. The filing of the suit for dissolution of marriage three months prior to the lodging of an F.I.R. Has belied clearly the present actions being taken by the informant and the local police. A lady who wants to get rid of a hateful marital union is being subjected tocoercive measures, so as to refrain her from exercising her legal right of obtaining divorce from the Court of law. Criminal proceedings have been initiated clearly with this motive and intention. It may be noted here that she had been residing in Dar-ul-Aman due to the fear of the informant and the proceedings were commenced as a counter-blast to the demand of divorce and to involve her and more persons into the blackmailing net. A wife, who does not want to live with a person of the class of informant, is in fact being made a prey for the illegal wishes of informant. Abuse of the process of law is apparent which cannot be blessed with approval. Therefore, from the facts and circumstances as noted above of the case and from the statements of the witnesses recorded by the police, I consider it a fit case for the quashment of the F.I.R. The abovenoted deductions and conclusions of law are supported by the following citations:--
(i) 2002 PCr.LJ 408 (Major Nasir Mahmood and others v. The State and others).
(ii) 1992 PCr.LJ 1455 (Mst. Nasreen Begum alias Sakina and another v. S.H.O. P.S. Jahania, District Khanewal and another).
(iii) 1995 PCr.LJ 797 (Mst. Razia Bibi v. S.H.O. And others).
(iv) 1997 PCr.LJ 928 (Muhammad Arshad v. Station House Officer and others).
(v) 1996 PCr.LJ 486 (Gulnaz and another v. The State and 3 others).
(vi) PLD 1997 Lahore 554 (Mst. Irshad Elahi v. Bashir Ahmad).
So, the writ petition is accepted and the F.I.R. Alongwith its subsequent proceedings is quashed. The petitioner as well as the persons involved in the case are declared exonerated from the charges levelled in the aforementioned F.I.R.
F.I.R. Quashed.