1989 PLP 2936 (MLD)
ABID KHAN and others — Petitioners Versus MUSHTAQ and others — Respondents
| Citation | 1989 PLP 2936 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Rashid Aziz Khan, J |
| Parties | ABID KHAN and others — Petitioners Versus MUSHTAQ and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 PLP 2936 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1989 PLP 2936 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Rashid Aziz Khan, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 PLP 2936 (MLD) (ABID KHAN and others — Petitioners Versus MUSHTAQ and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Kh. Altaf Ahmed for Petitioner.
- Inayat Hussain Chaudhry for Respondent No.1.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 561-A--Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 342, 354, 403, 448, 452, 506, 147 & 148/149--Quashing of proceedings--Accused summoned after preliminary investigation in complaint--Application under S.249-A, Cr.P.C. rejected after keeping it pending for number of years--Charge already framed--Case pending for recording of evidence--Quashment declined but Trial Court directed to conclude case within four months.
Judgment & Decree
S. 561-A--Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 342, 354, 403, 448, 452, 506, 147 & 148/149--Quashing of proceedings--Accused summoned after preliminary investigation in complaint--Application under S.249-A, Cr.P.C. rejected after keeping it pending for number of years--Charge already framed--Case pending for recording of evidence--Quashment declined but Trial Court directed to conclude case within four months. Kh. Altaf Ahmed for Petitioner. Inayat Hussain Chaudhry for Respondent No.1. The facts leading to the filing of this petition for quashment of proceedings arc that a complaint under section 448/403/354/342/145/147/5(16/452, P.P.C. was filed by Mushtaq Ahmad, respondent No.1, against the petitioners and respondents Nos. 2 to 5. After preliminary investigation, process against the respondents in the complaint was issued and the case remained pending since 28-7-1980 in which the charge has also been framed. The petitioner moved an application under section 249-A, Cr.P.C. praying for acquittal which was kept pending for a number of years, and ultimately rejected. 2. It is contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the case is pending since 1980 and there has not been any progress, therefore, the proceedings may be quashed. Submits that the petitioner has been undergoing the agony of the trial for the last almost nine years without there being any progress. Submits that the case against the petitioners is absolutely false and cannot result in conviction. The contentions have been opposed by learned counsel for the respondents. 3. I have heard the learned counsel and perused the record as well as' parawise comments submitted by A.C. Model Town Sub-Division, Lahore. Since the charge in the case has also been framed and the case is pending for recording of evidence, in such circumstances, I think it will suffice, if a direction to the trial Court is issued to conclude the trial within four months without fail. In case the trial Court is unable to conclude the case within the above said period he shall submit a detailed report enumerating the circumstances under which the trial could not be concluded. With these observations, the petition is disposed of. Office is directed to inform the trial Court immediately. N.H.Q./A-660/L Petition disposed of.