2010 PLP 958 (YLR)
Syed MUHAMMAD AMIN SHAH and another — Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD IHSAN and another — Respondents
| Citation | 2010 PLP 958 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Khawaja Muhammad Sharif, C J |
| Parties | Syed MUHAMMAD AMIN SHAH and another — Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD IHSAN and another — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Penal Code (XLV of 1860) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2010 PLP 958 (YLR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Penal Code (XLV of 1860) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2010 PLP 958 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Khawaja Muhammad Sharif, C J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2010 PLP 958 (YLR) (Syed MUHAMMAD AMIN SHAH and another — Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD IHSAN and another — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Syed Kazim Ali Bukhari for Petitioner.
- Sh. Naveed Shaheryar and Mazhar Hussain Ashraf for Respondent.
- KHAWAJA MUHAMMAD SHARIF, C.J.---This is second writ petition. Earlier Writ Petition No.4030 of 2006 filed by Allah Rakha was disposed of on 20-6-2006. Although lengthy arguments have been made by learned counsel for the petitioners but on the other hand, Sh. Naveed Sheheryar, Advocate on behalf of the respondent submits that Syed Muhammad Amin Shah on whose behalf Syed Allah Rakha has filed this writ petition, is an absconder in case F.I.R. No. 96 of 2006 dated 1-12-2006 registered under sections 420, 468, 471 P.P.C. read with section 5(2) 47 Prevention of Corruption Act. He further submits that how an absconder or any other on his behalf can file writ petition. Also submits that no general or special power of attorney on behalf of Syed Muhammad Amin Shah has been filed by Syed Allah Rakha Petitioner No.2, that an agreement to sell is on plane paper and on the said basis petitioner No. l is claiming the rights of the house in dispute. Adds that even in the body of the writ petition, it has not been mentioned by the learned counsel for the petitioners that Syed Allah Rakha petitioner No.2 is authorized to file the writ petition. He has relied upon. PLD 2001 Lahore 834, 2000 CLC 572 and PLD 2004 Karachi 17.
- 2. Learned Advocate-General Punjab supports the contentions raised by learned counsel for the respondent.
Headnotes / Summary
Ss. 420/468/471
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 199
Prevention of Corruption Act (II of 1947), S.5(2)
Constitutional petition
Accused was absconder and constitutional petition was filed by other person, who was not given general or special power of attorney on behalf of the accused
Accused who was proclaimed offender was not available in Pakistan
Nothing had been mentioned in the whole constitutional petition that petitioner was authorized to file constitutional petition
Constitutional petition was dismissed. PLD 2001 Lahore 834, 2000 CLC 572 and PLD 2004 Karachi 17 ref. Ch. Muhammad Hanif Khatana, A.-G. of Punjab.
Judgment & Decree
KHAWAJA MUHAMMAD SHARIF, C.J.
This is second writ petition. Earlier Writ Petition No.4030 of 2006 filed by Allah Rakha was disposed of on 20-6-2006. Although lengthy arguments have been made by learned counsel for the petitioners but on the other hand, Sh. Naveed Sheheryar, Advocate on behalf of the respondent submits that Syed Muhammad Amin Shah on whose behalf Syed Allah Rakha has filed this writ petition, is an absconder in case F.I.R. No. 96 of 2006 dated 1-12-2006 registered under sections 420, 468, 471 P.P.C. read with section 5(2) 47 Prevention of Corruption Act. He further submits that how an absconder or any other on his behalf can file writ petition. Also submits that no general or special power of attorney on behalf of Syed Muhammad Amin Shah has been filed by Syed Allah Rakha Petitioner No.2, that an agreement to sell is on plane paper and on the said basis petitioner No. l is claiming the rights of the house in dispute. Adds that even in the body of the writ petition, it has not been mentioned by the learned counsel for the petitioners that Syed Allah Rakha petitioner No.2 is authorized to file the writ petition. He has relied upon. PLD 2001 Lahore 834, 2000 CLC 572 and PLD 2004 Karachi 17.
2. Learned Advocate-General Punjab supports the contentions raised by learned counsel for the respondent.
3. Heard. I would not like to dilate upon the facts and merits of the case but the fact remains that Syed Muhammad Amin Shah petitioner No.1 is proclaimed offender and is not available in Pakistan. No general or special power of attorney has been placed on record by Syed Allah Rakha petitioner No.2 and even nothing has been mentioned in the whole writ petition that petitioner No.2 is authorized to file this writ petition, therefore, the same is dismissed. H.B.T./M-97/L Petition dismissed.