2019 PLP 363 (MLD)
KHADIM HUSSAIN SHAH — Petitioner Versus JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE and others — Respondents
| Citation | 2019 PLP 363 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | KHADIM HUSSAIN SHAH — Petitioner Versus JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2019 PLP 363 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2019 PLP 363 (MLD)?
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: 2019 PLP 363 (MLD) (KHADIM HUSSAIN SHAH — Petitioner Versus JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Muhammad Ajmal Adil and Muhammad Wasif Shahzad for Petitioner.
- Ch. Muhammad Jawad Yaqoob, Assistant Advocate General for Respondent.
- Syed Mazhar Hussain Shah for Respondents.
Headnotes / Summary
Ss.167 & 61
Penal Code (XLV of 1860 ), S.406
Misappropriation of an amount of Rs. 17,00,000/
Scope
Power of Magistrate to discharge accused
Scope
Petitioner/complainant contended that Investigation Officer sought physical remand of the accused, involved in misappropriation of huge amount, but Magistrate wrongly discharged the accused only after one day of his arrest
Record revealed that Magistrate, while declining the request of the Investigation Officer for remand of accused for ten days, proceeded to discharge the accused instead of taking into consideration the material available on record in its true perspective
Allegation against accused was that he misappropriated a huge amount to the tune of Rs. 17,00,000/- belonging to the complainant
Held, Magistrate had discharged the accused in haste without affording proper opportunity to the Investigating Officer to conclude his investigation in accordance with law
High Court set aside impugned order passed by the Magistrate and remanded the matter to the Magistrate to pass order afresh taking into consideration available material
Constitutional petition was allowed accordingly.
Judgment & Decree
SAYYED MAZAHAR ALI AKBAR NAQVI, J.
By means of instant constitutional petition filed in terms of Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, the petitioner has assailed the vices of order dated 22.04.2017 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Faisalabad.
2. While opening his arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is complainant of case FIR No.255, dated 02.03.2017, offence under Section 406, P.P.C., registered with Police Station, Batala Colony, Faisalabad. Adds that the Investigating Officer produced Abdul Shakoor (accused) before the learned Illaqa Magistrate seeking physical remand, but the learned Illaqa Magistrate discharged the accused on 22.04.2017 after only one day of his arrest whereas the allegation against the accused is that he has misappropriated an amount of Rs.17,00,000/-. Learned counsel submits that the order impugned passed by the learned Illaqa Magistrate is devoid of any legal justification as the learned Illaqa Magistrate has discharged the accused while going beyond his scope as the investigation in this case was at the early stage.
3. On the other hand, learned Law Officer assisted by learned counsel for the respondents has opposed this petition.
4. Arguments heard. Record available on file perused.
5. Undeniably, petitioner is the complainant of case FIR No.255, dated 02.03.2017, offence under Section 406, P.P.C., registered with Police Station, Batala Colony, Faisalabad. Bare perusal of the impugned order reflects that on 21.04.2017, only one day physical remand was granted by the learned Illaqa Magistrate. On 22.04.2017, the Investigating Officer produced the accused seeking further physical remand of ten days, but the learned Illaqa Magistrate instead of taking into consideration the material available on the record in its true perspective while declining the request of the Investigating in this regard proceeded to discharge the accused. It is worth mentioning here that allegation against the accused is that he has misappropriated an amount of Rs.17,00,000/- belonging to the complainant. Keeping in view the peculiar facts and circumstances of the instant case coupled with the allegation of misappropriation of huge amount, this Court is of the firm view that the learned Illaqa Magistrate has discharged the accused in haste without affording proper opportunity to the Investigating Officer to conclude his investigation quite in accordance with law.
6. For the foregoing reasons, this Court is persuaded to accept this petition. As a consequence whereof impugned order dated 22.04.2017 passed by the learned Illaqa Magistrate is set aside. The matter is remanded back with direction to the learned Illaqa Magistrate to pass order afresh while taking into consideration the material available on the record in its true perspective, quite in accordance with law.
7. Petition accepted. MQ/K-22/L Case remanded.