1987 P Cr (PLP)
Haji MUHAMMAD SHAFI — Petitioner Versus THE STATE and others — Respondents
| Citation | 1987 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Qurban Sadiq Ikram, J |
| Parties | Haji MUHAMMAD SHAFI — Petitioner Versus THE STATE and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1987 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1987 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Qurban Sadiq Ikram, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1987 P Cr (PLP) (Haji MUHAMMAD SHAFI — Petitioner Versus THE STATE and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Sardar Khalid Mahmood for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
Ss. 439 & 439-A--Revisional jurisdiction of High Court invoked under S.439, Cr.P.C. for getting orders of Trial Court set aside--Revision against orders of trial Magistrate was competent before Sessions Judge under S.439-A, Cr.P.C.--Petitioner advised to have sought his remedy before that Court in first instance. Akhtar Shabbir Asstt. A. G. for the State. Raja Mahmood Akhtar for some of the accused.
Judgment & Decree
Ss. 439 & 439-A--Revisional jurisdiction of High Court invoked under S.439, Cr.P.C. for getting orders of Trial Court set aside--Revision against orders of trial Magistrate was competent before Sessions Judge under S.439-A, Cr.P.C.--Petitioner advised to have sought his remedy before that Court in first instance. Sardar Khalid Mahmood for Petitioner. Akhtar Shabbir Asstt. A. G. for the State. Raja Mahmood Akhtar for some of the accused. It has been pointed out by the learned Assistant Advocate-General and also by the learned counsel for the accused-respondents that the present revision is directed against the judgment, dated 5-2-1986 passed by Mr. Muhammad Nawaz Sukhaira Magistrate 1st Class Kasur and as such it should have been filed under section 439-A, Cr.P.C. in the Sessions Court. The learned counsel for the petitioner on the other hand contends that no doubt the revision was competent before the Sessions Court but High Court has concurrent jurisdiction to hear revision against the impugned order passed by a Magistrate.
2. I have considered the above contentions on behalf of the parties. It is always desirable that the lowest Courts of competent jurisdiction should be approached by the respective parties to seek redress. The revision was competent against the impugned order before Sessions Judge Kasur and as such the petitioner should have sought remedy in that Court under section 439-A, Cr.P.C. against the impugned order. This petition is accordingly dismissed. S.G.D. Petition dismissed.