1982 PLP 73 (SCMR)
ABDUL ALEEM-Petitioner Versus SPECIAL JUDGE (CUSTOMS), LAHORE AND OTHERS-Respondents
| Citation | 1982 PLP 73 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Nasim Hasan Shah, JJ |
| Parties | ABDUL ALEEM-Petitioner Versus SPECIAL JUDGE (CUSTOMS), LAHORE AND OTHERS-Respondents |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1982 PLP 73 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1982 PLP 73 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Nasim Hasan Shah, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1982 PLP 73 (SCMR) (ABDUL ALEEM-Petitioner Versus SPECIAL JUDGE (CUSTOMS), LAHORE AND OTHERS-Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Zaheer Ahmad Khan, Advocate and Ejaz Ahmad Khan, Advocate-on- Record for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondents
- Date of hearing: 10th August 1981.
- Zaheer Ahmad Khan, Advocate and Ejaz Ahmad Khan, Advocate‑on- Record for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from judgment and order of the Lahore High Court dated 30-6-1980 in W. P. 737/1980).
Arts. 199 & 185(3)-Extraordinary jurisdiction-Approach of High Court in refusing to deflect normal course of a criminal case through exercise of writ jurisdiction, held, not only salutary but also in accord with principles laid down by Supreme Court-Writ petition being not competent and having been rightly dismissed, leave to appeal declined. Ghulam Muhammad v, Muhammad Khan and 4 others P L D 1967 S C 317 ref.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑‑ Arts. 199 & 185(3)‑Extraordinary jurisdiction‑Approach of High Court in refusing to deflect normal course of a criminal case through exercise of writ jurisdiction, held, not only salutary but also in accord with principles laid down by Supreme Court‑Writ petition being not competent and having been rightly dismissed, leave to appeal declined. Ghulam Muhammad v, Muhammad Khan and 4 others P L D 1967 S C 317 ref. Zaheer Ahmad Khan, Advocate and Ejaz Ahmad Khan, Advocate‑on- Record for Petitioner. Nemo for Respondents Date of hearing: 10th August 1981. MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.‑Leave to appeal has been sought from judgment dated 30th June, 1980 of the Lahore High Court whereby a constitutional petition arising out of an order passed by a Court of Criminal jurisdiction was dismissed. A learned Special Judge (Customs) notwithstanding legal objections raised from the petitioner's side with regard to competency of the criminal proceedings before him, formally charged the petitioner. A criminal revision filed by the petitioner having been dismissed, he sought relief for the annul ment of the criminal case through a writ petition and the same having been dismissed mainly on the ground that the High Court would not in its discretionary jurisdiction short‑circuit for the normal procedure of trial as provided by law, the petitioner has now sought leave to appeal. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner in support of the grounds taken in this petition at some length, we are of the view that the approach of the learned Single Judge in the High Court in refusing to deflect the normal course of a criminal case through exercise of writ jurisdic tion is not only, salutary but also in accord with the principles laid down by this Court in Ghulam Muhammad v. Muzammal Khan and 4 others (PLD1967SC317) although the case dealt with therein was under ordinary general law. In our view, the writ petition was not competent and having rightly been dismissed, there is no justification for entertaining this petition. The same is accordingly dismissed. Petition dismissed.