1994 P Cr (PLP)
M. SIDDIQUE SUBEDAR — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 1994 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | M. SIDDIQUE SUBEDAR — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1994 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1994 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1994 P Cr (PLP) (M. SIDDIQUE SUBEDAR — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Masood Mirza for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 497
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.420/468/471
Offences under Ss.468 & 471, P.P.C. being non-cognizable, police was not competent to investigate the case without the formal order of the Magistrate-- Case under S.420, P.P.C. too could be registered against the accused on the application of the purchaser and not on the report of the Magistrate
Offence under S.420, P.P.C. even otherwise was bailable
Interim pre-arrest bail granted to accused was confirmed in circumstances.
Judgment & Decree
Masood Mirza for Petitioner. Arif Ali Hazoor for the State. Date of hearing: 19th December, 1993. The petitioner, who is involved in a case under section 420/468/471, P.P.C. arising out of F.I.R. No.172, dated 27-10-1993, registered at Police Station Sahiwal, District Sargodha, seeks to be admitted to pre-arrest bail. Vide order, dated 14-12-1993, the petitioner was admitted to ad interim pre arrest bail. Today, the case is fixed for confirmation or otherwise of the aforesaid order.
2. As per F.I.R., the allegation against the petitioner is that he used to sell substandard manure.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the offences under sections 468 and 471, P.P.C. are non-cognizable and in view of section 155, Cr.P.C., the police is not competent to investigate the case without the formal order of the Magistrate and that offence under section 420, P.P.C. is bailable. The complainant has lodged the F.I.R. against the petitioner on the report of some enemy of the petitioner and the petitioner who is a retired Haveldar of the Army is being prosecuted for ulterior motive and if he is arrested, his prestige would be lowered in the eye of public. Placed reliance on P L D1983 S C 82.
4. Learned counsel for the State assisted by the Police Officer has conceded this fact that there is no formal order on the file by the Magistrate authorising the police to investigate the case under sections 468 and 471, P.P.C. He half-heartedly argued that the report has been lodged by the Magistrate himself; hence there is no need for any formal order by the Magistrate. He has also referred to the report of the Chemical Examiner, which is against the petitioner.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record admittedly, the police is not competent to investigate the case for offences under sections 468 and 471, P.P.C. From the record, the case made out against the petitioner may fall under section 420, P.P.C. that too can be registered on the application of the purchaser and not on the report of the Resident Magistrate. As the offence under section 420, P.P.C. is bailable, hence the ad interim pre-arrest bail granted to the petitioner by order, dated 14-12-1993, is confirmed. N.H.Q./M-1382/L Interim bail confirmed.