1968 P Cr (PLP)
RAMZAN-Petitioner Versus Maulvi FAIZ AHMAD-Respondent
| Citation | 1968 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Baghdad-ul-Jadid |
| Bench Members | Ataullah Sajjad, J |
| Parties | RAMZAN-Petitioner Versus Maulvi FAIZ AHMAD-Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1968 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1968 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Baghdad-ul-Jadid bench comprising: Ataullah Sajjad, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1968 P Cr (PLP) (RAMZAN-Petitioner Versus Maulvi FAIZ AHMAD-Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Ch. Muhammad Amjad Khan for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
(a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 439 read with Ss. 537 & 561
A
Illegality discovered in proceedings
Renders whole trial, vitiated--Appellate Court held, not called upon, in such circumstance, to examine merits of case before ordering retrial. (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 537 [as amended by Code of Criminal Procedure (West Pakistan Amendment) Act (XVII of 1964)]
Charge framed against accused under S. 506, Part II, P. P. C.--Order of conviction made "under S. 506 Part II, read with S. 34, P. P. C."
Illegality, held, curable under S. 537. (c) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 439 read with S. 423 Retrial
Incriminating circumstance brought on record by testimony of prosecution witness not put to accused
Judgment & Decree
(b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 537 [as amended by Code of Criminal Procedure (West Pakistan Amendment) Act (XVII of 1964)]
Charge framed against accused under S. 506, Part II, P. P. C.--Order of conviction made "under S. 506 Part II, read with S. 34, P. P. C."
Illegality, held, curable under S. 537. (c) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 439 read with S. 423 Retrial
Incriminating circumstance brought on record by testimony of prosecution witness not put to accused
Accused prejudiced by such omission
Order of retrial maintained. Ch. Muhammad Amjad Khan for Petitioner. The learned counsel argues that the learned Sessions Judge, Rahimyarkhan, before ordering re-trial in this case should have considered the merits of the case and should have given a finding, as to whether the case was worth ordering a re-trial. The general principle of law is that when an illegality is discovered in certain proceedings, the whole trial stands vitiated. The learned Sessions Judge found two illegalities in the proceedings against the present petitioners. In the first instance, he found that whereas the charge framed against them under section 506, Part II of the Pakistan Penal Code did not mention section 149 of the Pakistan Penal Code, the ultimate order of conviction was made under section 506, Part II read with section 34 of the Pakistan Penal Code. Secondly, he found that Muhammad Rafiq (P. W. 4) made a statement against the accused and his evidence was made the basis for their convictions, but the incriminating circum stances brought on the record by this witness's testimony were never put to the accused. So far as the first illegality is concerned; in my view, it could be cured by application of section 537 of the Criminal Procedure Code as amended by West Pakistan Act XVIII of 1964.
2. The second ground for re-trial holds however, good because the accused has definitely been prejudiced by the omissions of the trial Court to put the evidence of Muhammad Rafiq to him. In my view, the learned Sessions Judge was not called upon to examine the merits of the case when he found an irregularity in the case which vitiated the whole proceedings.
3. I find no force in this revision petition which is hereby dismissed in limine. Petition dismissed.