1993 PLP 571 (PLC(CS))
FARYAD HUSSAIN and 4 others Versus PRESIDING OFFICER, VITH SINDH LABOUR COURT, HYDERABAD
| Citation | 1993 PLP 571 (PLC(CS)) |
| Forum / Court | Labour Appellate Tribunal Sindh |
| Bench Members | Agha Ali Hyder, Appellate Tribunal |
| Parties | FARYAD HUSSAIN and 4 others Versus PRESIDING OFFICER, VITH SINDH LABOUR COURT, HYDERABAD |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1993 PLP 571 (PLC(CS))?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1993 PLP 571 (PLC(CS))?
The case was heard and decided by the Labour Appellate Tribunal Sindh bench comprising: Agha Ali Hyder, Appellate Tribunal.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1993 PLP 571 (PLC(CS)) (FARYAD HUSSAIN and 4 others Versus PRESIDING OFFICER, VITH SINDH LABOUR COURT, HYDERABAD). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Date of hearing: 7th March, 1993.
Headnotes / Summary
(a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑ ‑‑‑‑S. 561‑A‑‑‑Quashing of proceedings‑‑‑‑Proceedings could be quashed only if all allegations made, even if accepted in entirety, did not make out ingredients of offence. (b) Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)‑‑‑ ‑‑‑‑S. 38(3‑A)‑‑‑Revision‑‑‑Application under S. 38(3‑A) would not lie as of right. Suleman Habibullah for Applicant.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑‑‑S. 561‑A‑‑‑Quashing of proceedings‑‑‑‑Proceedings could be quashed only if all allegations made, even if accepted in entirety, did not make out ingredients of offence. (b) Industrial Relations Ordinance (XXIII of 1969)‑‑‑ ‑‑‑‑S. 38(3‑A)‑‑‑Revision‑‑‑Application under S. 38(3‑A) would not lie as of right. Suleman Habibullah for Applicant. Date of hearing: 7th March, 1993. There are two Revision Applications filed by Mr. Suleman Habibullah with the prayer to quash the proceedings instituted against the informants for the breach of the terms of a settlement with the C.BA.
2. It cannot be said that the statements recorded under section 200, Cr.P.C. do not make out a prima facie case of breach. The proceedings can be quashed only if all the allegations made, even if accepted in entirety, as these have to be ‑‑‑ do not make out ingredients of an offence.
3. Otherwise too an application under section 38(3‑A) does not lie as of right and I do not find any occasion to take up the proceedings suo motu when only cognisance has been taken. Both the applications are therefore dismissed in limine. H.B.T./2173/Lb.S Applications dismissed.