How to lodge an Fir through attorney in Pakistan , when you are living abroad.
⚖️ ایف آئی آر بذریعہ مختار درج کرانا — لاہور ہائی کورٹ کا اہم فیصلہ (2025 LHC 5989)
Mirza Yahya Baig vs The State etc.
جسٹس محمد امجد رفیق، لاہور ہائی کورٹ
---
🧾 مقدمے کا پس منظر:
مرزا مظہر بیگ، جو ایک اوورسیز پاکستانی ہیں، کی ملکیتی زمین (9 ایکڑ) ضلع شیخوپورہ میں واقع تھی اور مرزا یحییٰ بیگ کے قبضے میں بطور لیز تھی۔
سال 2024 میں مرزا یحییٰ بیگ نے زمین واپس کرنے سے انکار کر دیا۔ بعد ازاں انکشاف ہوا کہ اس نے اپنے بھائی مرزا طاہر بیگ کے ساتھ مل کر ایک جعلی معاہدہ فروخت (Agreement to Sell) تیار کیا، جس پر جعلی دستخط کیے گئے اور سول کورٹ سے سٹے آرڈر بھی حاصل کر لیا۔
چونکہ مرزا مظہر بیگ بیرونِ ملک تھے، انہوں نے اپنا مختار (Attorney) محمد عثمان بیگ مقرر کیا، جس نے ان کی طرف سے پولیس اسٹیشن نارنگ میں ایف آئی آر درج کرائی۔
---
⚖️ ہائی کورٹ نے قرار دیا کہ:
1. ایف آئی آر بذریعہ مختار درج کرانا مکمل طور پر قانونی ہے، اگر مختار پرنسپل کی اجازت سے کارروائی کر رہا ہو۔
2. مختار عدالت میں فوجداری کارروائی بھی شروع کر سکتا ہے، اور اگر پرنسپل غیر دستیاب یا معذور ہو جائے تو عدالت کی اجازت سے مقدمہ جاری رکھ سکتا ہے۔
3. ایف آئی آر میں مختار کا نام “Informant” کے طور پر ہونا دفعہ 154 ض ف کے منافی نہیں، کیونکہ پولیس رولز 1934 میں “Informant” اور “Complainant” دونوں تسلیم شدہ ہیں۔
4. عدالت نے واضح کیا کہ فوجداری نظامِ انصاف میں “Attorney” کا تصور موجود ہے، جیسے کہ
دفعہ 491 و 552 (Bailiff کی تعیناتی)،
دفعہ 503 (گواہوں کے بیان کے لیے کمیشن)،
جو ظاہر کرتا ہے کہ عدالت نمائندوں کے ذریعے بھی کارروائی کر سکتی ہے۔
5. اوورسیز پاکستانیوں کے لیے عدالت نے کہا کہ The Punjab Overseas Pakistani Commission Act 2021 کے تحت ان کے مختار کو فوجداری کارروائی میں شامل ہونا جائز اور مفید ہے۔
6. عدالت نے قرار دیا کہ اگر کوئی مختار جھوٹی ایف آئی آر یا بدنیتی پر مبنی شکایت درج کرے، تو اس کے خلاف کارروائی پاکستان پینل کوڈ 1860 کی دفعات 181، 182، 211، 213، 250 کے تحت کی جا سکتی ہے۔
---
🔍 عدالتی مشاہدات بر ضمانت:
PFSA رپورٹ کے مطابق، معاہدہ فروخت پر دستخط جعلی ثابت ہوئے (Tracing تکنیک سے بنائے گئے)۔
دونوں ملزمان زمین ہتھیانے کی سازش میں شریک پائے گئے۔
ان کے خلاف کسی بدنیتی یا ذاتی دشمنی کا کوئی ثبوت نہیں ملا۔
عدالت نے قرار دیا کہ Pre-Arrest Bail ایک غیر معمولی رعایت ہے، جو صرف بدنیتی پر مبنی گرفتاری کی صورت میں دی جاتی ہے، جو یہاں ثابت نہیں ہوئی۔
لہٰذا عدالت نے دونوں ملزمان کی پری اریسٹ ضمانتیں مسترد کر دیں اور عارضی ضمانت بھی منسوخ کر دی۔
---
Exactly wording of the Court
Crl.Misc. No.53550-8/2025 13
Crl. Misc. No.42305-8/2025
the existence of reasonable grounds to confide that he is not guilty of the offence alleged against him and the case is one of further inquiry."
16. Thus, petitioners could not satisfy the court that they are entitled to be granted pre-arrest bail within the contemplation of sections 497/498 of the Code. In view of the above, both these petitions stand dismissed and ad-interim pre-arrest bail already granted to the petitioners is hereby recalled.
17. Before concluding this order, the Court acknowledges with appreciation the valuable assistance rendered by Mr. Balal Munir, Research Officer, whose diligent efforts enabled the Court to access the latest available law on the subject.
Muhammad Amjad Rafiq Judge.
Approved for Reporting
Judge
Signed on 10.10.2025
Javed
Crl.Misc. No.53550-8/2025 12
Crl. Misc. No.42305-8/2025
applications. Misuse of process by attorney, through registration of false FIR or filing of private complaint, can well be met through sound remedial measures including action pursuant to sections 181, 182, 211, 213 and 250 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. Thus, contention of learned counsel for the petitioners that FIR cannot be registered through attorney is nothing but farce.
15. On merits, case against the petitioners has been attended; the alleged agreement to sell was sent to PFSA for comparison of signatures of Mirza Mazhar Baig over it with his authentic signatures available at different documents, which returned with an expert
opinion as under;
"After careful examination and comparison of Questioned Signatures on item no. 1.1 using Video Spectral Comparator (VSC-6000, Software version 6.6), it is concluded that Questioned Signatures on item no. 1.1 are non-genuine and have been produced by manipulative technique such as tracing.
The above report coupled with the fact that both the petitioners during investigation were found involved in commission of offence. They were in league with each other and have prepared a forged agreement to sell to usurp the property of Mirza Mazhar Baig. Thus, petitioners have no case on merit. This is pre-arrest bail and there is no apparent malafide against the petitioners. Their false implication is not spurred out from the record. The concession of pre-arrest bail is an extra ordinary relief, which is meant only for innocent persons where the intended arrest of an accused is found to be actuated with malafide on part of the complainant or the police. I have not seen any malice or ulterior motive on part of the complainant to falsely implicate petitioners, therefore, they are not entitled to the extra-ordinary relief of pre-arrest bail as claimed for. Reliance is placed on a case reported as "GULSHAN ALI SOLANGI and others versus The STATE through P.G. Sindh" (2020 SCMR 249). Reliance is further placed on the case reported as "AHTISHAM ALI versus The STATE" (2023 SCMR 975),
wherein it has been held that:-
"It is well settled exposition of law that the grant of pre-arrest bail is an extraordinary relief which may be granted in extraordinary situations to protect the liberty of innocent persons in cases lodged with mala fide intention to harass the person with ulterior motives. By all means, while applying for pre-arrest bail, the petitioner has to satisfy the Court with regard to the basic conditions quantified under section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 ("Cr.P.C") vis-à-vis
Crl. Misc. No.53550-8/2025 11
Crl. Misc. No.42305-8/2025
Code except in offences mentioned in section 195, 196, 1964, 197, 198 198A, 199, 199A and 199B of the Code or if any prohibition is contained in any special law. Such view is also supported by a judgment of Supreme Court of India reported as "Vishwa Mitter Versus O.P. Poddar" (1984 AIR (SC) 5).
13. It is desirable to pin that criminal admınıstration of justice cannot dispense justice through a judge or court alone, rather it has introduced certain measures which may include appointment of Bailiff (u/s 491,552 of the Code), appointment of Jury (Section 138 of the Code), local inquiry (Section 148 of the Code) and Commission for the examination of witnesses (Section 503 of the Code), which impliedly means that court also acts through attorney. Thus, concept is inherent in criminal justice system. Moreso, Mirza Mazhar Baig is an overseas Pakistani and Government is also committed to attend the genuine grievances of overseas Pakistanis with a speedy way out to save their property and life of their children. In this respect "The Punjab Overseas Pakistani Commission Act 2021" has also been promulgated. Under section 7 of such Act, Overseas Commissioner is required to process the complaint of an overseas Pakistani to the concerned government agency or the committee for redressal. In such situation understanding is clear that for follow up, an attorney of overseas Pakistani can join the proceedings.
14.
Depending upon the above discussion, it is held that an attorney of a person can lodge an FIR with the police and can also initiate criminal proceedings before a Court for the interest of his Principal. If the proceedings before the court were initiated by the principal, and he becomes unavailable or incapacitated, the attorney can also continue it on his behalf with the permission of the Court. Court should also encourage such practice keeping in view the hardships involved in the case to reduce delays in the criminal process which would restore the confidence of public on the courts of law for acquisition or regulation of their rights. There is no doubt that Court shall decide the matter on production of relevant evidence only that can also be recorded by using modern techniques like through online
Crl. Misc. No.53550-8/2025 2
Crl. Misc. No.42305-8/2025
4. Learned counsel seeks bail for the petitioners merely on two grounds that the FIR was lodged through attorney which course is not recognized in law and in support whereof he relied on cases reported as "SONIA SHARIEF Versus ADDITIONAL DISTRICT AND SESSIONS JUDGE and others" (2024 CLC 1170); "KHALID MEHMOOD and 3 others Versus SAFDAR IOBAL and another" (2017 P Cr. LJ 1104); "GHAZANFAR ALI Versus M. ZAHID HUSSAIN and others" (PLD 2011 Lahore 179). Secondly, that the matter in dispute is pending before the civil court which has the ultimate jurisdiction for the determination of civil rights of the parties and before that no criminal action can be initiated. On the other hand, Learned Deputy Prosecutor General and learned counsel for the complainant opposed the bail on the ground that FIR has legally been registered and forgery on agreement to sell stands proved by the report of PFSA, whereas civil and criminal proceedings can go side by side.
5. While taking the objections of learned counsel for the petitioners, it is observed that the second objection is not of worth at this stage of the proceedings because of an approved jurisprudential regime that civil and criminal proceedings can go side by side, until criminal proceedings are ordered to be stayed till the decision of civil litigation. So far as the first objection is concerned, suffice it to observe that recitals of FIR are in oral account of Mirza Mazhar Baig owner/Principal, and name of attorney namely Muhammad Usman Baig, is mentioned as informant only which does not offend the spirit of section 154 of Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 ("the Code") as it identifies an informant only and not the complainant. However; Form No. 24.5 (1) of Police Rules 1934 accommodates both informant and the complainant; therefore, contention of counsel somewhat loses its force. For instance, if somebody requests others to pass on information to police that he/she is being subjected to certain offence, would that passing of information be not considered as first information report. It is trite that any person authorized or bound by a public duty including a police officer can report the crime or commission of any offence which is not merely a personal wrong but a public wrong too that violates the public law. This Court in a case
Form No.HCJD/C-121
ORDER SHEET
IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, LAHORE.
(JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT)
Crl.Misc.No.53550-B/2025
Mirza Yahya Baig vs The State, etc.
Crl.Misc.No.42305-B/2025
Mirza Tahir Baig VS The State, etc.
S.No. of order/Proceedings
Date of order/Proceedings
Order with signature of Judge, and that of parties of counsel, where necessary.
30.09.2025
S. M. Zeeshan Mirza, Advocate with petitioners.
Mr. Muhammad Asif Ashraf, Deputy Prosecutor
General with Murtaza Sub-Inspector.
Hafiz Rehman Aziz, Advocate for the complainant.
These are second pre-arrest bail applications on behalf of was respective petitioners; earlier (Crl.Misc.No.7907-B/2025) dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 27.02.2025, because at that time their arrest was deferred till the result of reports qua comparison of thumb impressions and signatures on the disputed documents.
2. Petitioners Mirza Yahya Baig and Mirza Tahir Baig through their respective bail petitions i.e., Crl.Misc.No.53550-B/2025 and Crl.Misc.No.42305-B/2025 seek pre-arrest bail in case FIR No.1966 dated 02.12.2024 for offences under sections 420, 468, 471 of Pakistan Penal Code 1860 ("the PPC") registered at police station Narang, District Sheikhupura.
3. Mirza Mazhar Baig, an overseas Pakistani living in Canada maintains a piece of land measuring Nine (9) Acres at Mouza Ghorian Mughlaan, Tehsil Muridkay, District Sheikhupura which was on lease with Mirza Yahya Baig, accused/petitioner who refused to return the landed property in year 2024. Upon which it stands disclosed that he has prepared an ante-dated forged agreement to sell dated 09.05.2017 attested by witnesses including Mirza Tahir Baig, accused/petitioner, and then obtained an injunctive order from the concerned civil court by filing a suit for specific performance. Mirza Mazhar Baig got lodged present FIR through his attorney namely Muhammad Usman Baig and claimed that on 09.05.2017, he was in Canada as reflected from entry and exit stamps on his passport.
Popular articles
No comments:
Post a Comment