SCMR 1978

1978 PLP 132 (SCMR)

Dr. MUHAMMAD ALYAS HASHMI‑Petitioner Versus MASOOD KHAN AND 5 OTHERS‑Respondents

Jurisdiction / Court
High Court
Decided Date
Criminal Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 107‑R of 1977, decided on 13th November 1977.
Honorable Judges
Muhammad Afzal Cheema and Dorab Patel, JJ
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 1978 PLP 132 (SCMR)
Forum / Court High Court
Bench Members Muhammad Afzal Cheema and Dorab Patel, JJ
Parties Dr. MUHAMMAD ALYAS HASHMI‑Petitioner Versus MASOOD KHAN AND 5 OTHERS‑Respondents
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1978 PLP 132 (SCMR)?

This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1978 PLP 132 (SCMR)?

The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Muhammad Afzal Cheema and Dorab Patel, JJ.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 1978 PLP 132 (SCMR) (Dr. MUHAMMAD ALYAS HASHMI‑Petitioner Versus MASOOD KHAN AND 5 OTHERS‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Representation

  • Nemo for Respondents.
  • Date of hearing: 13th November 1977.

Headnotes / Summary

(On appeal from the order of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, dated 17th July 1977, passed in Writ Petition No. 1509 of 1977). Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--‑

S. 307/450/148/149 read with S. 253‑‑Cross‑cases‑Petitioner not approaching police for getting case registered against respondents and taking full one week to. file his complaint against respondents after his release on bail in respect of occurrence taking place more than two months earlier, such case having been initiated against him by .respondents‑Petitioner allegedly attacked by five persons yet receiving only one injury as against eight received by one of respondents‑‑High Court, held, rightly dismissed petitioner's writ petitionConstitution of Pakistan (197'?), 4,rt. 199. Petitioner in person.

Judgment & Decree

MUHAMMAD AFZAL CHEEMA, J.‑Doctor Muhammad Alyas Hashmi petitioner herein feels aggrieved by the order of the Lahore High Court, dated 17.7‑1977 whereby has Writ Petition No. 1059 of 1977 was dismissed in limine. Mr. Hashmi has appeared in person and has argued his own case. According to him on 20‑3‑1975 while present in his Clinic Styled Atomi Health Centre, Murree Road, Rawalpindi, he was assaulted by respondents 1 to 5 and received an injury below the right eye and also grappled with one of the assailants who received right injuries case under section 307, P. P. C was registered against the petitioner which is still pending trial in the Court of the Ilaqa Magistrate. He was arrested and was released on bail after about 2 months when he filed a complaint against respondents 1 to 5 under section 307/450 /148/149, P. P. C. It appears that instead of consolidating the police challan against the petitioner and the complaint filed by him the learned Magistrate took up his case separately and after recording preliminary evidence discharged the respondents under section

253. Cr. P. C. His revision against this order was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge whereupon he invoked the constitutional jurisdiction of the High Court and his writ petition was dismissed in limine as stated earlier giving rise to the present petition. We heard the petitioner quite at some length. Obviously he could not appreciate, the legal aspect of the matter and insisted on taking us through the statements of the witnesses produced by him at the preliminary hearing of his complaint. From the perusal of the record, it appears that he did no approach the police for getting a case registered against the respondents. While attacked by five assailants, he received only one injury as against eight by one of the assailants. Even otherwise it took him full one week to file the complaint after his release on bail in respect of the occurrence which had taken place more than two months earlier. We do not find any illegality in the High Court's order which had rightly dismissed his writ petition. The petition has no merit and is accordingly dismissed. Petition dismissed.