YLR 2005

2005 PLP 2544 (YLR)

MANZOOR HUSSAIN — Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD SIDDIQUE and 2 others — Respondents

Jurisdiction / Court
Lahore
Decided Date
Criminal Miscellaneous No.2100-M of 2004, decided on 4th March, 2005.
Honorable Judges
Mian Muhammad Najam-uz- Zaman, J
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2005 PLP 2544 (YLR)
Forum / Court Lahore
Bench Members Mian Muhammad Najam-uz- Zaman, J
Parties MANZOOR HUSSAIN — Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD SIDDIQUE and 2 others — Respondents
Primary Law Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2005 PLP 2544 (YLR)?

This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2005 PLP 2544 (YLR)?

The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Mian Muhammad Najam-uz- Zaman, J.

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

Cite this legal precedent as: 2005 PLP 2544 (YLR) (MANZOOR HUSSAIN — Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD SIDDIQUE and 2 others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Representation

  • Sardar Muhammad Ramzan for Petitioner.
  • Mian Muhammad Nawaz Nazar Dhuddi for Respondents.
  • Date of hearing: 4th March, 2005.

Headnotes / Summary

Ss. 516-A & 517

Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.406, 420 & 506

Custody of Bus on Superdari

Matter pertained to custody of bus on Superdari which was subject-matter of case for offence under Ss.406, 420 & 506, P.P.C.

After registration of case, Superdari of bus was handed over to petitioner on his application in that respect

On filing revision against order of handing over bus to petitioner by respondents, said order was set aside and Superdari of bus was handed over to respondents

Last possession of bus was with respondents and police had taken over custody of bus from respondents after registration of said case

Impugned order had also revealed that respondents had already paid amount to petitioner as sale price of bus

No justification existed to upset said order, in circumstances. Ms. Tasnim Amin for the State.

Judgment & Decree

This matter pertains to the custody of bus on Superdari bearing Registration No.LXT-7257 subject-matter of case FIR. No.150 dated 9-4-2003 for the offence under sections 406/420/506, P.P.C. registered at Police Station, Gogera District Okara. After the registration of said case upon the application of the petitioner, Superdari of said bus was ordered to be handed over to the petitioner, vide order dated 11-6-2003 passed by the Magistrate 1st Class Okara. Against .the said order revision was filed by respondents Nos.1 and 2 learned Additional Sessions Judge, Okara vide order dated 6-12-2004 while setting aside the order of Magistrate handed over the custody of bus in question to the respondents. Through this petition legally. the respondents order has been challenged.

2. Admittedly the last possession of .the bus was with the respondents, police had taken over the custody of bus from the possession of the respondents after the registration of said case. The impugned order also reveals that respondents have already paid Rs.2,11,000 to the petitioner as sale price of the bus. Similarly the bus is a subject-matter of case F.I.R. No.150 dated 9-4-2003 for the offence under sections 406/420/506, P.P.C. registered at Police Station, Gogera District Okara and this case has already been cancelled by the police. In the circumstances there is no justification to upset the order of revisional Court dated 6-12-2004. Finding no force the same stands dismissed. H.B.T./M-1090/L??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Petition dismissed.