1986 P Cr (PLP)
NASRULLAH KHAN Petitioner Versus THE STATE Respondent
| Citation | 1986 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Zafarullah, J |
| Parties | NASRULLAH KHAN Petitioner Versus THE STATE Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1986 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 1986 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Muhammad Zafarullah, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1986 P Cr (PLP) (NASRULLAH KHAN Petitioner Versus THE STATE Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ch. Muhammad Yaqoob Sidhu for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑Ss. 249‑A & 561‑A‑‑Quashing of criminal proceedings‑‑Agreement of sale of land‑‑Civil suit for specific performance of agreement, pending in Court‑‑Other pleas showing abuse of process of law, raised‑ Contentions, held, were not be adjudicated in such proceedings as those could be raised before trial Magistrate under 5.249‑A‑‑Petition dismissed. Nemo for the State. Mushtaq Raj for the Complainant.
Judgment & Decree
Ch. Muhammad Yaqoob Sidhu for Petitioner. Nemo for the State. Mushtaq Raj for the Complainant. A criminal case pending against the petitioner in a criminal Court at Wazirabad which was registered against him at the instance of Fateh Muhammad complainant, is sought to be quashed through this criminal miscellaneous. An agreement, dated 22‑1‑1975 for sale of land, said to have been executed by the complainant, in favour of the petitioner, is the subject‑matter of the criminal case.
2. It is contended that before registration of the criminal case, the petitioner brought a civil suit for specific performance of the agreement aforesaid and till its decision the criminal Court should not have proceeded with the hearing of the criminal matter. Some other pleas have also been urged to show that the registration of the case itself was an abuse of the process of law.
3. These contentions need not be adjudicated upon in these proceedings for these can well be raised by the petitioner before the learned trial Magistrate in pursuance of the provision of section 249‑A. Cr.P.C. If such an application is made, it shall be decided before embarking upon the hearing on merits. With these observations, the criminal miscellaneous is disposed of. S.A. Petition dismissed.