Register
MLD 1989

1989 PLP 4647 (MLD)

MULAZIM HUSSAIN and others — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent

Jurisdiction / Court
Karachi
Decided Date
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 115 of 1988, decided on 19th January, 1989.
Honorable Judges
Abdul Razzak A. Thahim, J
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 1989 PLP 4647 (MLD)
Forum / Court Karachi
Bench Members Abdul Razzak A. Thahim, J
Parties MULAZIM HUSSAIN and others — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent
Primary Law Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 PLP 4647 (MLD)?

This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1989 PLP 4647 (MLD)?

The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: Abdul Razzak A. Thahim, J.

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

Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 PLP 4647 (MLD) (MULAZIM HUSSAIN and others — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Representation

  • Abdul Rahim for Respondent No. 1.

Headnotes / Summary

S.561-A--Quashing of proceedings--Trial Court was not moved under section 265-K Cr.P.C.--Revisional jurisdiction in Hudood cases vests in Federal Shariat Court--Nobody for the petitioners being present, petition was dismissed for no w prosecution without going into the merits of the case. Petitioners and their counsel called absent. Masood Shaharyar for the State.

Judgment & Decree

This is an application under section 561-A, Cr.P.C. for quashment of proceedings pending in the Court of Additional Sessions Judge Hudood (East) Karachi. The petitioners and their counsel are not present and there is no request for adjournment. It is contended by the learned counsel for the complainant that the lower Court has not been moved as provided under section 265-K Cr. P.C., A which is mandatory requirement. Learned counsel for the State supports the contention of Mr.A.Rahim. Moreover, according to Article 203-DD of the Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, the revisional jurisdiction in the Hudood cases vests with Federal Shariat Court. Without going into the merits of the case, this Cr.Misc. is dismissed due to non-prosecution. S.A./M-944/K

Legal Tools

Metadata Directory

  • Journal: MLD
  • Volume Year: 1989
  • Citation Ref: 1989 PLP 4647 (MLD)

Cite & Link (Backlink Generator)

Are you writing a blog or referencing this case? Copy the optimized HTML link below to cite this judgment on your website and create a legal backlink:

HTML Backlink Code:
Text Citation:

Related Judgments

  • 1989 M L D 4096 SHIV CHARAN — Appellant Versus STATE OF HARYANA — Respondent
  • 1989 M L D 3695 APPABHAI and another — Appellants Versus STATE OF GUJARAT — Respondent
  • 1989 M L D 3683 NAT STEEL EQUIPMENT (PVT). Ltd. Appellant Versus COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE — Respondent
  • 1989 M L D 3372 BURMAH-SHELL OIL DISTRIBUTING COMPANY — Petitioner Versus Khaja MIDHAT NOOR and others — Respondents
  • 1989 M L D 3364 PATAURI DEVI and others — Appellants Versus AMAR NATH and others — Respondents
  • 1989 M L D 3327 AWADHESH and another — Appellants Versus STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH — Respondent