2012 PLP 1075 (MLD)
HAQ NAWAZ — Petitioner Versus Haji ALAM KHAN and 8 others — Respondents
| Citation | 2012 PLP 1075 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Sindh |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | HAQ NAWAZ — Petitioner Versus Haji ALAM KHAN and 8 others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2012 PLP 1075 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2012 PLP 1075 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Sindh bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2012 PLP 1075 (MLD) (HAQ NAWAZ — Petitioner Versus Haji ALAM KHAN and 8 others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Muhammad Muneer Ahmed for Petitioner.
- Adnan Karim Memon, A.A.-G. for Respondents.
Headnotes / Summary
Ss. 173 & 190
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 452/395/504/161/ 337-A(i)
Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 199
Constitutional petition
Cognizance of offence by Magistrate
Scope
Judicial Magistrate while disagreeing with the report submitted by the investigation officer, directed him to submit charge sheet against the accused (petitioner)
Contention of accused was that although Judicial Magistrate was competent to take cognizance under S. 190, Cr.P.C, however, no power vested in the court to override any legal provision and direct the investigation officer either to submit or not to submit a report in a particular manner
Prosecution conceded to such contention of the accused
Constitutional petition was allowed, impugned order was set-aside and Magistrate was directed to hear the parties and pass an order thereon afresh.
Judgment & Decree
Vide order impugned herein the learned 1st Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate West Karachi, while disagreeing with the report submitted by the I.O. in Crime No.649 of 2011, recorded at Police Station Saeedabad, for offence under sections 452, 395, 504, 161, 337-A(1), P.P.C., directed the I.O. to submit Charge Sheet against the accused. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that though the Judicial Magistrate is competent to take cognizance under section 190, Cr.P.C., however, no power vests in the court to override any legal provisions and direct the I.O. either not to submit the report or to submit such report in a particular manner. In support of his contention, the learned counsel has relied upon the case of Naseer and others v. Khuda Bakhsh and others 2011 SMCR 1430, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme court had set aside a similar order passed by this Court and held that the petitioners of section 173, Cr.P.C, provided that on conclusion of investigation, the concerned S.H.O. is required to submit a report of the result thereof in the prescribed manner and the concerned Magistrate is competent to take cognizance under section 190, Cr.P.C. However, he cannot direct the I.O. to submit report in a particular manner. Mr. Adnan Karim Memon, learned A.A.-G., concedes to the above. We would, therefore, allow the petition and set aside the impugned order by directing the concerned Magistrate to hear the parties and pass an order thereon afresh. M.W.A./H-10/K Petition allowed.