PCRLJ 1968

1968 P Cr (PLP)

ABDUL HAMID‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑Respondent

Jurisdiction / Court
Supreme Court
Decided Date
Criminal Review Petition No. 11 of 1967, decided on 20th December 1967.
Honorable Judges
S. A. Rahman and Hamoodur Rahman, JJ
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 1968 P Cr (PLP)
Forum / Court Supreme Court
Bench Members S. A. Rahman and Hamoodur Rahman, JJ
Parties ABDUL HAMID‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑Respondent
Primary Law Constitution of Pakistan (1962)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1968 P Cr (PLP)?

This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1962) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1968 P Cr (PLP)?

The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court bench comprising: S. A. Rahman and Hamoodur Rahman, JJ.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 1968 P Cr (PLP) (ABDUL HAMID‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Constitution of Pakistan (1962)

Representation

  • Muhammad Ashfaq Khan, Senior Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Wali Muhammad Khawaja, Senior Attorney for Petitioner.
  • Date of hearing : 20th December 1967.

Headnotes / Summary

(In the matter of review of this Court order dated the 22nd June, 1967 in Criminal Petition No. 141 of 1967).

Art. 62‑Review‑Points urged in support of petition relating to facts present to mind of Court when previous petition disposed of‑No fresh point arising for con sideration ‑ No case for review, held, made out and petition dismissed. Nemo for the State.

Judgment & Decree

S. A. RAHMAN, J.‑The petitioner Abdul Hamid sought special leave to appeal from this Court from the order of a learn ed Single Judge of the High Court of West Pakistan by which the transfer of four cases pending against him under sections 406 and 420 of the Pakistan Penal Code, from the Court of the Additional District Magistrate, Muzaffargarh, was refused. His petition for special leave to appeal was dismissed by a Bench of this Court by order dated the 22nd June 1967. 'Abdul Hamid seeks review of this Court's order. The points urged by Rao Muhammad Ashfaq Khan in support of this petition relate to facts which were present to the minds of the learned Judges of this Court when the petition for special leave to appeal was disposed of. No fresh point arise for consideration such as would justify review of the previous, order of this Court. The only point urged by .the learned counsel is that if one case had been transferred from the Court of the Additional District Magistrate at the petitioner's request, the other four cases should have been treated similarly. This position obtained even at the time of the previous order. No case for review has been made out and we dismiss the petition. Petition dismissed.