Você está na página 1de 3

The page cannot be found

1 of 1

http://pakistanlawsite.com/LawOnline/law/topbar.asp

The page cannot be found


The page you are looking for might have been removed, had its name
changed, or is temporarily unavailable.

Please try the following:


If you typed the page address in the Address bar, make sure that
it is spelled correctly.
Open the pakistanlawsite.com home page, and then look for links
to the information you want.
Click the Back button to try another link.
HTTP 404 - File not found
Internet Information Services
Technical Information (for support personnel)
More information:
Microsoft Support

13/01/2016 14:03

Case Judgement

1 of 2

1968

http://pakistanlawsite.com/LawOnline/law/content21.asp?Casedes=19...

P Cr. L J 525

[Lahore]
Before Muhammad Siddiq, J
Sh. MUHAMMAD ASLAMPetitioner
Versus
JAVAID AKHTAR AND OTHERSRespondents
Criminal Revision No. 1139 of 1967, decided on 24th January 1968.
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 488 read with West Pakistan Family Courts Act (XXXV of
1964), Ss. 5 & 20 and (Vest Pakistan Government Notification No. Integ. 10316411 dated
541966Jurisdiction of Criminal Courts under S. 488, Cr. P. C. Held, excluded 6y Family Courts Act,
1964.
Noor Zaman v. Mst. Saidano P L D 1967 Pesh. 343 fol.
Syed Tanseer Asghar for Appellant.
Iftikhar Ahmed Dar for Respondents.
JUDGMENT
This is a petition for revision under section 439, Cr. P. C., directed against the order dated the 7th
of September 1967, passed by Kh. Ihsanul Haq, Additional Sessions Judge, Lahore, whereby he dismissed
the revision petition of the petitioner against the order of the SubDivisional Magistrate, Kasur, holding
that he had the jurisdiction to proceed with the application under section 488, Cr. P. C. filed in his Court
by the respondent against the petitioner.
2. It is alleged in the grounds of revision that the jurisdiction of the ordinary Criminal Courts under
section 488, Cr. P. C. is ousted by reason of the provisions of the Family Courts Act, 1964. According to
the preamble of the Family Courts Act, 1964 the intention underlining the Act was to establish the Family
Courts "for the expeditious settlement and disposal of disputes relating to marriage and family affairs and
for matters connected therewith." Section 5 of the Act lays down that "Subject to the provisions of the
Muslim Family Laws Ordinance, 1961, and the Conciliation Courts Ordinance, 1961, the Family Courts
shall have exclusive jurisdiction to entertain, hear and adjudicate upon matters specified in the Schedule."
The Schedule contains six items including "maintenance" mentioned at No. 3. There is no indication that
the term "maintenance" is restricted only to proceedings taken for proper maintenance on the civil side
and not on the criminal side. The matter has not rested at that. Section 20 of the Act lays down that
"Government may invest any Judge of a Family Court with powers of Magistrate First Class to hear the
case under section 488 of the. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898". That clearly indicates the intention of
the Legislature to bestow necessary powers on the Family Courts to be able to deal with maintenance
cases contemplated by section 488, Cr. P. C. In exercise of the powers vesting in the Government under
section 20 ibid. The Government of West Pakistan issued Notification No. Integ. 103164/1, dated the
5th of April 1966, according to which "The Governor of West Pakistan is pleased to invest all Judges of
the Family Courts with powers of, Magistrate of First Class to make orders for maintenance under section

13/01/2016 14:03

Case Judgement

2 of 2

http://pakistanlawsite.com/LawOnline/law/content21.asp?Casedes=19...

488 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898". The intention of the Act was thus completed to enable the
Presiding Officer of the Family Court to deal with cases under section 488 of the Criminal Procedure
Code. According to section 5 of the Act, the Family Courts are Courts of exclusive jurisdiction in respect
of the scheduled matters. Hence the jurisdiction of the ordinary Criminal Courts to proceed under section
488, Cr. P. C. is excluded. This matter has been dealt with in Noor Zaman v. Mst. Saidano (P L D 1967
Pesh. 343) in which my learned brother, Faizullah Khan, J. has dealt with the matter at considerable
length and held that the jurisdiction of the ordinary Criminal Courts under section 488, Cr. P. C. is
excluded by the provisions of the Family Courts Act, 1964. I am in respectful agreement with the
aforementioned pronouncement and hold that the learned SubDivisional Magistrate, Kasur, was not
competent to proceed with the maintenance case under section 488 of the Criminal Procedure Code. 1,
therefore accept this petition for revision and hold that the learned S. D. M. Kasur has no jurisdiction to
proceed with the case under section 488, Cr. P. C.,
Petition accepted.

13/01/2016 14:03