1997 P Cr (PLP)
KHADIM HUSSAIN — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 1997 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | KHADIM HUSSAIN — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1997 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1997 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1997 P Cr (PLP) (KHADIM HUSSAIN — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 4
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S.439
Sessions Court's order returning the record of the case on police request for submission of challan to Special Court
S.H.O. had moved an application before Sessions Court for returning the interim challan and other papers to him for submission before the Special Court constituted under the Suppression of Terrorist Activities (Special Courts) Act, 1975 which was allowed by the impugned order-- Additional Sessions Judge without examining case papers as to whether a scheduled offence was made out had acted on the request of police, although he was competent to refuse said request if the record did not reveal the commission of a scheduled offence
Impugned order did not show that a scheduled offence was made out against the accused and the same was consequently set aside-- Revision petition was accepted accordingly.
Judgment & Decree
Muhammad Yousaf Laghari for Applicant. Abdul Latif Ansari, Asstt. A.G., Sindh for the State. Date of hearing: 23rd May, 1996. The impugned order of the learned IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Mirpur Khas is as under:-- "The S.H.O., Kot Ghulam Muhammad filed an application, requesting therein that the interim order challan and other papers may be returned to him for submission of challan before the Court of Suppression of Terrorist Activities (S.T.A.) at Hyderabad, as directed by Superintendent of Police, Mirpur Khas to 5.11.0. concerned. The R & P of the above Sessions case duly page Nos. l to 122 which was received by this Court are submitted herewith for action as deemed necessary, in the light of the request of concerned police." Learned State Counsel does not support this order because learned Additional Sessions Judge has acted on request of police without examining case papers as to whether a scheduled offence is made out. Since there is no mention that the scheduled offence was made it was in the competence of the concerned Additional Sessions Judge to refuse the request of police. This order does not reveal that the scheduled offence has been made out and therefore, this order cannot be upheld. This impugned order is therefore, set aside. In case the trial Judge is of the view that the scheduled offence is made out then after hearing the concerned parties, he may make any order in accordance with law. This Criminal Revision Application No. 13 of 1996 stands disposed of. N.H.Q./K-19/K Revision accepted.