📝 AI Summary — Plain-Language Overview
This case involves a dispute between a husband and wife over accusations of adultery. The husband made written and verbal statements accusing his wife of zina (adultery) and claimed that all three of their children were illegitimate. These accusations were made after the husband had already divorced his wife and executed a divorce deed, meaning their marital relationship had legally ended.
Under Pakistan's Offence of Qazf (Enforcement of Hadd) Ordinance, 1979, falsely accusing someone of adultery is a punishable offense under Sections 6 and 7. However, Section 14 of the same law provides an exception when such accusations happen between a husband and wife during their marriage, treating it differently since spouses have legal mechanisms like li'an (mutual imprecation) to handle such accusations within marriage.
The trial court initially refused to frame charges under Section 7, believing this was simply a marital dispute where Section 14 should apply. The Federal Shariat Court disagreed and ordered charges to be framed under Sections 6 and 7, reasoning that since the divorce had already occurred, the parties were no longer husband and wife but simply a man and a woman when the accusations were made.
The Supreme Court upheld this reasoning and refused the husband's request for leave to appeal, meaning the Federal Shariat Court's decision stood. This case clarifies that the special marital exception under the Qazf law does not protect a person who makes such serious accusations after the marriage has already ended through divorce.
یہ کیس میاں بیوی کے درمیان زنا کی الزام تراشی سے متعلق ایک تنازعے پر مبنی ہے۔ شوہر نے تحریری اور زبانی طور پر اپنی بیوی پر زنا کا الزام لگایا اور یہ دعویٰ کیا کہ ان کے تینوں بچے ناجائز ہیں۔ یہ الزامات اس وقت لگائے گئے جب شوہر پہلے ہی اپنی بیوی کو طلاق دے چکا تھا اور طلاق نامہ تحریر کر چکا تھا، یعنی ان کا ازدواجی رشتہ قانونی طور پر ختم ہو چکا تھا۔
پاکستان کے قانون آفنس آف قذف (نفاذِ حد) آرڈیننس 1979 کے تحت، کسی پر جھوٹا زنا کا الزام لگانا دفعہ 6 اور 7 کے تحت قابلِ سزا جرم ہے۔ تاہم اسی قانون کی دفعہ 14 میں ایک استثنا موجود ہے جو اس وقت لاگو ہوتا ہے جب ایسے الزامات میاں بیوی کے درمیان ازدواجی رشتے کے دوران لگائے جائیں، کیونکہ میاں بیوی کے پاس ایسے الزامات سے نمٹنے کے لیے لعان جیسا قانونی طریقہ کار موجود ہوتا ہے۔
ٹرائل کورٹ نے ابتدائی طور پر دفعہ 7 کے تحت فردِ جرم عائد کرنے سے انکار کر دیا، یہ سم
Generated from the full judgment text below — not a substitute for reading the actual opinion.
Citation Name : 2010 SCMR 681 SHARIAT APPELLATE JURISDICTION Side Appellant : Haji BAKHTAWAR SAID MUHAMMAD Side Opponent : Mst. DUR-E-SHAHWAR BEGUM Ss. 6, 7 & 14---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.203-F(2B)---Trial Court had refused to frame the charge under section 7 of the Offence of Qazf (Enforcement of Hadd) Ordinance, 1979, on the ground that the petitioner had levelled the charge of adultery etc. against the respondent during the subsistence of marriage and that the dispute being between husband and wife, S.14 of the said Ordinance was attracted in the case---Federal Shariat Court accepting the revision petition filed by the respondent set aside the order of Trial Court and remanded the case with the direction to frame the charge under Ss.6 & 7 of the Offence of Qazf (Enforcement of Hadd) Ordinance, 1979, and proceed with the case in accordance with law-Validity-Relationship of husband and wife (between the parties) had admittedly come to an end on the day when the petitioner had divorced the respondent and executed the divorce deed---Facts disclosed by the petitioner in his evidence adduced during preliminary inquiry under S.202, Cr.P.C. had revealed that the petitioner and respondent were just a man and a women and not husband and wife, when the petitioners in his three written statements, before his elder brother and allegedly also before a Punchayat in his own house, had made imputation of Zina against the respondent and explicitly alleged that all of her three children were Illegitimate children---Action of petitioner, therefore, had clearly attracted the provisions of Ss.6 & 7 of the Offence of Qazf (Enforcement of Hadd) Ordinance, 1979, and there was no question of S.14 of the said Ordinance being attracted in the case---Leave to appeal was refused to petitioner by Supreme Court accordingly.