1994 P Cr (PLP)
NAEEM AHMAD and others — Petitioners Versus S.H.O. and others — Respondents
| Citation | 1994 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | NAEEM AHMAD and others — Petitioners Versus S.H.O. and others — Respondents |
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) (NAEEM AHMAD and others — Petitioners Versus S.H.O. and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Q.M. Salim for Petitioners.
- Farooq Bedar, A.A.-G. for Respondents.
- The facts, in brief, are that Muhammad Iqbal, Constable Police Station Mang Bazar, Faisalabad, moved an application to the D.I.-G., Faisalabad for registration of a case against the accused. On the same day, a direction was issued to the S.S.P. by the D.I.-G, for holding an enquiry. Ultimately, the enquiry was entrusted to the S.D.P.O., Chiniot. On 7-6-1993, after collecting the necessary evidence, the- Enquiry Officer came to the conclusion that the allegations levelled by the complainant against the accused were false. On the same set of allegations, a case under section 380, P.P.C. was registered with Police Station Langrana, District Jhang vide F.I.R. Annexure "A". It is argued by the learned counsel that in view of the clear cut findings 01 the S.D:P.Q. it was not possible for the subsequent Police Officer to .register a case under section 380, P.P.C. vide Annexure "A" against the petitioner. At the very outset, the learned Additional Advocate-General states that he would have no objection if the impugned F.I.R. vide Annexure "A" is quashed because there was no justification to register a case on the allegations which were earlier found to be false by the S.D.P.O. This being so, the registration of the impugned F.I.R. vide Annexure "A" against the petitioner is hereby, declared to be without lawful authority and of no legal consequence. The same is quashed. The petition succeeds and is allowed.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 380
Constitution of Pakistan (1,973), Art.199
Quashing of F.I.R.
Allegations levelled against accused had already beets found to be false by the S.D.P.O., the Enquiry Officer
No justification was, therefore, available to register the case against the accused on the same allegations and the prosecution had no objection if the F.I.R. was quashed
Registration of the said F.I.R. against the accused was consequently declared to be without lawful authority and of no legal effect and the same was quashed accordingly.
Judgment & Decree
Writ Petition No.1684 of 1994, decided on 9th April, 1994,
S. 380
Constitution of Pakistan (1,973), Art.199
Quashing of F.I.R.
Allegations levelled against accused had already beets found to be false by the S.D.P.O., the Enquiry Officer
No justification was, therefore, available to register the case against the accused on the same allegations and the prosecution had no objection if the F.I.R. was quashed
Registration of the said F.I.R. against the accused was consequently declared to be without lawful authority and of no legal effect and the same was quashed accordingly. Q.M. Salim for Petitioners. Farooq Bedar, A.A.-G. for Respondents. Date of hearing: 9th April, 1994. The facts, in brief, are that Muhammad Iqbal, Constable Police Station Mang Bazar, Faisalabad, moved an application to the D.I.-G., Faisalabad for registration of a case against the accused. On the same day, a direction was issued to the S.S.P. by the D.I.-G, for holding an enquiry. Ultimately, the enquiry was entrusted to the S.D.P.O., Chiniot. On 7-6-1993, after collecting the necessary evidence, the- Enquiry Officer came to the conclusion that the allegations levelled by the complainant against the accused were false. On the same set of allegations, a case under section 380, P.P.C. was registered with Police Station Langrana, District Jhang vide F.I.R. Annexure "A". It is argued by the learned counsel that in view of the clear cut findings 01 the S.D:P.Q. it was not possible for the subsequent Police Officer to .register a case under section 380, P.P.C. vide Annexure "A" against the petitioner. At the very outset, the learned Additional Advocate-General states that he would have no objection if the impugned F.I.R. vide Annexure "A" is quashed because there was no justification to register a case on the allegations which were earlier found to be false by the S.D.P.O. This being so, the registration of the impugned F.I.R. vide Annexure "A" against the petitioner is hereby, declared to be without lawful authority and of no legal consequence. The same is quashed. The petition succeeds and is allowed. N.H.Q./N-259/L Petition allowed.