1971 PLP 367 (SCMR)
ALLAHBANDA AND ANOTHER‑Petitioners Versus Haji AKHIAUDDIN AND ANOTHER‑Respondents
| Citation | 1971 PLP 367 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | ALLAHBANDA AND ANOTHER‑Petitioners Versus Haji AKHIAUDDIN AND ANOTHER‑Respondents |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1971 PLP 367 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1971 PLP 367 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1971 PLP 367 (SCMR) (ALLAHBANDA AND ANOTHER‑Petitioners Versus Haji AKHIAUDDIN AND ANOTHER‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- S. Abrar Hussain Naqvi, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by S. Ali Imam Naqvi, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing : 10th April 1971.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of N.‑W. F. P. Peshawar, dated the 26th February 1971, in Criminal Miscellaneous. No. 37 of 1971). Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 561‑A‑Successive application for quashment of criminal proceeding without any fresh material having been brought on record‑Not maintainable -Such a course would itself amount to abuse of process of Court.
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD YAQUB ALI, J.‑A complaint under sec tions 419 and 420, P. P. C. was filed against the petitioners by Haji Akhiauddin, respondent, in the Court of a Magistrate at Bannu. The petitioners who reside in Karachi and were summoned to appear in Court thereupon moved the High Court of N.‑W. F. P. under section 561‑A, Cr. P. C., for quashment of the complaint and in the alternative for transfer of the case to Peshawar District. At the hearing of the petition the learned counsel for the petitioners did not press for quashment of the proceedings in the complaint and the prayer to that effect was rejected. The second prayer was, however, allowed and the case was transferred to the Court of a Magistrate in district Dera Ismail Khan. Before any witnesses were examined, the petitioners again applied to the High Court for quashment of the proceedings under section 561‑A, Cr. P. C. The application was dismissed by another learned Judge on the ground that a previous application in similar terms had been dismissed by a Judge of this Court and he was not competent to review his order. The petitioners now seek leave to appeal inter alga on the ground that there was no legal bar to the institution of a second petition under section 461‑A, Cr. P C., for quashment of the proceedings in the complaint case and the High Court has erred in refusing to exercise jurisdiction in it by law. Mr. Ibrar Hussain Naqvi, who appeared in support of the petition, did not cite any authority in support of the pro position that repeated applications for quashment under sec tion 561‑A can be maintained without any fresh material having been brought on the record. Indeed such a course will amount to an abuse of the process of the Court and on that ground alone the second application was liable to be dismissed. The trial Court next expressed apprehension that if the petitioners undertake a journey to Dera Ismail Khan the respon dent will have them murdered. He, therefore, asked for transfer of the case to district Peshawar. We are not seized with the question of transfer of the case from D. I. Khan to Peshawar district. But if the petitioners apprehend danger, they should seek help from the Police and we are in no doubt that the District Police as well as the Magistrate in whose Court the petitioners have to put in appearance will afford them necessary protection. The petition is dismissed. Leave refused.