1988 PLP 265 (SCMR)
MANZOOR HUSSAIN SHAH — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 1988 PLP 265 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Aslam Riaz Hussain and Saad Saood Jan, JJ |
| Parties | MANZOOR HUSSAIN SHAH — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1988 PLP 265 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1988 PLP 265 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Aslam Riaz Hussain and Saad Saood Jan, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1988 PLP 265 (SCMR) (MANZOOR HUSSAIN SHAH — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- K.H. Khurshid, Advocate Supreme Court and S. Abid Nawaz, Advocate-on-Record (absent) for Petitioner.
- Date of hearing: 28th November, 1987.
Headnotes / Summary
(From the judgment, dated 15-3-1987 of the Lahore High Court passed in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 24/Q of 1987).
Ss.249-A & 561-A--Quashing of criminal proceedings--Petitioner challaned for forging power of attorney and selling land on basis thereof and his applications for quashment of proceedings before trial Court failed--Order impugned--Since no evidence had yet been recorded, it was, held, premature to say if power of attorney was or was not a forged document, it was therefore, not a fit case where proceedings before a Magistrate should be quashed at this stage. Nemo for the State.
Judgment & Decree
SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.--This is a petition for special leave to appeal from the order, dated 15-3-1987 of the Lahore High Court whereby the petitioner's application for the quashment of proceedings in a criminal case pending against him and another in the Court of a Magistrate at Sialkot was dismissed.
2. The allegations against the petitioner are that he forged a power of attorney in his favour on behalf of one Mst. Zainab Bibi, had it registered and subsequently, on the basis of that power of attorney sold the land owned by her in favour of his nephew, Yousaf Shah. Mst. Zainab Bibi is dead. Her brothers who are her heirs learnt about the power of attorney and the sale-deed during the course of mutation proceedings which were initiated by the revenue authorities with regard to the property left by her. They filed a civil suit inter alia for a declaration that the said documents were forged and of no legal effect. They also moved the local Assistant Commissioner for taking action in the matter. The Assistant Commis sioner sent their application to the sub-divisional police officer who then had a case registered at Police Station Head Marala. After investi gation the local police sent a challan against the petitioner and his nephew to the Court of a Magistrate at Sialkot. The petitioner and the co-accused filed an application before the trial Court under section 249-A, Criminal Procedure Code, for acquittal but without any success. The petitioner then moved the High Court for the same relief but his application was dismissed. He now seeks leave to appeal from this Court.
3. So far no evidence has been recorded by the learned Magistrate. It is, therefore, premature to say if power of attorney purporting to have been executed by Mst. Zainab Bibi was or was not a forged document. It is, therefore, not a fit case where the proceedings before the Magistrate should be quashed at this stage. The only contention raised in support of this petition is that while disposing of the application for interim relief sought by the brothers of Mst. Zainab Bibi, the Civil Judge had he the power of attorney to be a genuine document and; therefore, there was no basis for initiating criminal proceedings against the petitioner. We have gone through the order made by the learned Civil Judge. He has not given any definite finding of the nature alleged by the petitioner. All that he has stated is that since the power of attorney and the sale-deed were registered documents, a presumption of genuineness was attached to them. This finding was intended only for the purpose of disposing of the prayer for interim relief sought by the brothers of Mst. Zainab Bibi and was thus of an ad hoc nature. It may be mentioned that the trial of the suit has not yet concluded.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner then prayed that during the pendency of the civil suit the proceedings in the criminal case should be stayed. We find that no such prayer was made either before the High Court or before the learned Magistrate. The petitioner, if so advised, may move the appropriate forum in this regard which would no doubt consider his request on its own merit.
5. For the reasons stated above, we find no substance in this petition which is hereby dismissed. M . I . / M-260/ S Petition dismissed.