ORDER SHEET
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH AT KARACHI

Constitutional Petition No. D-2710 of 2017

                                                                                                                                                                                                                Date                                       Order with Signature of the Judge                                                                   

1.For orders on office objection.

2.For hearing of CMA No. 13233/2017.

3.For hearing of main case.

 

9th April, 2018.

Mr. Mumtaz Ali Khan Deshmukh, Advocate for petitioner.

Mr. Hakim Ali Shaikh, Additional Advocate General, Sindh.

SI Abdullah Police Station Shahra-e-Faisal and

SI Muhammad Haroon, Police Station Gulistan-e-Jauhar, Karachi.

>>>>>> <<<<<<

Aftab Ahmed Gorar, J.:- Comments/statement filed by respondents 5 and 6 are taken on the record. Respondent No.5 in his comments stated that FIR No. 19 of 2016 under section 420/468/471/506-B/34 PPC was registered at Police Station Gulistan-e-Jauhar and she is absconder. Similarly in his comments, respondent No.6 has also submitted that many cases have been registered against the petitioner at Police Station Shahra-e-Faisal, Karachi.

 

2.         Admittedly, the petitioner is shown to have involved in crime No. 19 of 2016 under section 420/468/471/506-B/34 PPC registered at Police Station Gulistan-e-Jauhar and has been declared as absconder; and she has filed this petition after registration of above FIR in the year 2017 against the respondents for causing her harassment instead of surrendering herself before the competent court of law. Invoking the Constitutional jurisdiction of the High Court instead of availing of remedy provided for under the relevant law would only be justified when the impugned order/action was palpably without jurisdiction as to force an aggrieved person in such a case to approach the forum provided under the relevant statute may not be just and proper. The extraordinary constitutional jurisdiction of this Court under Article 199 of the Constitution is equitable and discretionary and is to be exercised only where substantial rights of a party have been invaded in flagrant violation of law and which can be established without any comprehensive inquiry into the facts.

 

3.         Despite repeated calls petitioner is not in attendance which affirms that she is absconder in the above crimes. In view of above the petitioner is directed to approach the concerned Court for grant of bail or otherwise. Accordingly, the petition is disposed of alongwith pending application.

 

 

 

 

                                                                                                            J U D G E

 

 

*Aamir/PS*                                                                 J U D G E