2011 P Cr (PLP)
ZAHID HUSSAIN — Petitioner Versus THE STATE and others — Respondents
| Citation | 2011 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | ZAHID HUSSAIN — Petitioner Versus THE STATE and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2011 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 2011 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: 2011 P Cr (PLP) (ZAHID HUSSAIN — Petitioner Versus THE STATE and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Khawar Mehmood for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
Ss. 410 & 423
Dismissal of criminal appeal for non-prosecution--Petitioner had assailed orders of the Trial Court whereby his criminal appeal against his conviction was dismissed for non prosecution; and later on his application for restoration of the same was also dismissed
After admission of criminal appeal, it could not be dismissed without adverting to the merits thereof; and non-appearance of the appellant or his counsel, was not a ground for dismissal, unless all the raised questions were determined and factual and legal aspects were thrashed as contemplated under S.423, Cr.P.C.
Impugned orders passed by the Trial Court, were not warranted by law; and were against well settled principle of criminal jurisprudence
Said orders were set aside by High Court and matter was remanded to the appellate court for decision of appeal afresh on merits after hearing both the parties strictly in accordance with law.
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD ANWAARUL HAQ, J.
Through this petition, Zahid Hussain petitioner assails the orders dated, 30-9-2010 and 16-10-2010 whereby learned Additional Sessions Judge dismissed his criminal appeal against his conviction for non-prosecution and later on dismissed his application for restoration of the same.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that impugned orders of learned trial Court are against the basic settled legal proposition that a criminal appeal cannot be dismissed for non-prosecution and the learned trial court while passing impugned orders has committed a material irregularity; that arguments in criminal appeal against conviction of the petitioner had already been advanced by his learned counsel and the case was fixed only for pronouncement of judgment. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that a criminal appeal ought to have been decided on merits under section 423 of the Cr.P.C.
3. Learned Deputy Prosecutor-General very frankly concedes to the legal proposition and does not oppose this petition.
4. Heard.
5. Admittedly, it is a settled legal principle that after admission of a criminal appeal, it cannot be dismissed without adverting to the merits thereof and non-appearance of appellant or his counsel is not a ground for dismissal unless all the raised questions are determined and factual and legal aspects are thrashed as contemplated under section 423, Cr.P.C. I respectfully refer the esteemed judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in case of Muhammad Bakhsh v. The State (1986 SCMR 59) wherein Apex Court has observed asunder:-- "The proposition of law that a criminal appeal once admitted to regular hearing by the High Court must be decided on merits and cannot be dismissed for non- prosecution, is fully supported by the pronouncement of this Court in Muhammad Ashiq Faqir v. The State PLD 1970 SC 177 "
6. In view of the case law referred above I, am of the considered view that impugned orders dated 30-9-2010 and 16-10-2010 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Lahore are not warranted by law and are against the well settled principle of criminal jurisprudence. Therefore, I, allow this revision petition, set aside both the impugned orders and remand back the matter to the learned appellate Court for decision of appeal afresh on merits, after hearing both the parties strictly in accordance with law. H.B.T./Z-52/L Case remanded.