1985 P Cr (PLP)
MUHAMMAD IQBAL‑‑Appellant Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1985 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Munir Khan, J |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD IQBAL‑‑Appellant Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Penal Code (XLV of 1860)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1985 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1985 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Muhammad Munir Khan, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1985 P Cr (PLP) (MUHAMMAD IQBAL‑‑Appellant Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ghulam Hussain Qureshi for Appellant.
- Date of hearing: 8th July, 1984.
Headnotes / Summary
S.430‑‑Prevention of Corruption Act (II of 1947), S.5(2)‑‑Jurisdic tion‑‑Offence under S. 430, P.P.C. not a specified offence‑‑Special Judge Anti‑Corruption, held, had no jurisdiction to try accused‑ Conviction and sentence set aside, in circumstances.‑‑(Jurisdiction). Mian Mushtaq for the State.
Judgment & Decree
S.430‑‑Prevention of Corruption Act (II of 1947), S.5(2)‑‑Jurisdic tion‑‑Offence under S. 430, P.P.C. not a specified offence‑‑Special Judge Anti‑Corruption, held, had no jurisdiction to try accused‑ Conviction and sentence set aside, in circumstances.‑‑(Jurisdiction). Ghulam Hussain Qureshi for Appellant. Mian Mushtaq for the State. Date of hearing: 8th July, 1984. This criminal appeal arises from the judgment of the learned Senior Special Judge Anti‑Corruption, Punjab, Lahore whereby he on 7‑11‑1977 convicted Muhammad Iqbal Patwari appellant under section 430, P.P.C. read with section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 and sentenced him till rising of the Court and a fine of Rs.500 in default thereof to further R.I. for six months. 2. Since after hearing the learned counsel for the parties I am inclined to accept this appeal on the ground of lack of jurisdiction of the learned Senior Special Anti‑Corruption, Punjab, Lahore to try the appellant for the commission of offence under section 430, P.P.C. therefore I need not set out the facts in detail and enter into the merits of the case. Admittedly the offence punishable under section 430, P.P.C. is not a specified offence. On this short ground, I am of the view that the trial Court has no jurisdiction to try the appellant for the offence under section 430, P.P.C. read with section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947. For what has been stated above, the appeal is accepted and the conviction and sentence of the appellant is set aside. Since there was no legal trial, therefore, I am not in a position to convict or acquit the appellant. The fine, if paid be refunded to the appellant. S. G. D. Appeal allowed.