2020 P Cr (PLP)
SHAHID IQBAL and others — Petitioners Versus STATION HOUSE OFFICER and others — Respondents
| Citation | 2020 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | SHAHID IQBAL and others — Petitioners Versus STATION HOUSE OFFICER and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2020 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2020 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2020 P Cr (PLP) (SHAHID IQBAL and others — Petitioners Versus STATION HOUSE OFFICER and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Sheraz Zaka for Petitioner.
- Pervaiz Iqbal Gondal, Additional, A.-G. and Rasheed, SI with record for Respondents.
Headnotes / Summary
Ss. 173, 154, 249-A & 265-K
Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 199
Constitutional petition
Quashing of FIR after Trial Court had taken cognizance of the offence and after filing of report under S. 173, Cr.P.C.
Petitioner sought quashment of FIR against him, even though report under S. 173, Cr.P.C. had been submitted before court of competent jurisdiction
When report under S. 173, Cr.P.C. had been submitted before court of competent jurisdiction, then FIR could not be quashed and petitioner/accused could agitate his grievances by way of filing of appropriate application before Trial Court under relevant laws
Constitutional petition was disposed of, accordingly.
Judgment & Decree
ANWAARUL HAQ PANNUN, J.
Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks quashing of FIR inter alia mainly on the ground that under section 12(xix) read with section 39 of the Intellectual Property Organization of Pakistan Act, 2012, being Special Law, police was not competent either to lodge FIR or to investigate the matter under Ordinary Law. In order to elaborate his arguments, learned counsel has relied upon case titled Dr. Syed Iqbal Raza and others v. Justice of Peace, Islamabad and others (CLD 2019 Islamabad 642) and case titled Director General, FIA and others v. Kamran Iqbal and others (2016 SCMR 447) contends that superior courts have ample jurisdiction to quash the abuse of process of law while exercising extra ordinary jurisdiction under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 and has thus prayed for acceptance of instant constitutional petition.
2. Conversely, it has been apprised by the learned Law Officer after consulting record that report under section 173, Cr.P.C. has been submitted before the court of competent jurisdiction for trial on 30.09.2019, therefore, in view of the dictums of law laid down by the august Supreme Court of Pakistan in the reported cases of Muhammad Abbasi v. SHO, Bhara Kahu and 7 others (PLD 2010 Supreme Court 969) and Director-General, Anti-Corruption Establishment, Lahore and others v. Muhammad Akram Khan and others (PLD 2013 Supreme Court 401), the petition in hand has lost its relevance. Resultantly, the petition in hand is disposed of with the observation and expectations that in case the petitioner agitates his grievances by way of filing of an appropriate application before the court of competent jurisdiction under the relevant law for the relief prayed for through this petition, learned trial court shall decide the same before proceeding further, in accordance with law. KMZ/S-40/L Order accordingly.