2011 PLP 1220 (CLD)
DG EPA — Complainant Versus HAFEEZ STEEL MILLS — Respondent
| Citation | 2011 PLP 1220 (CLD) |
| Forum / Court | Environmental Tribunal Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | DG EPA — Complainant Versus HAFEEZ STEEL MILLS — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Pakistan Environmental Protection Act (XXXIV of 1997) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2011 PLP 1220 (CLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Pakistan Environmental Protection Act (XXXIV of 1997) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2011 PLP 1220 (CLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Environmental Tribunal Lahore bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2011 PLP 1220 (CLD) (DG EPA — Complainant Versus HAFEEZ STEEL MILLS — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Azhar Majeed Bhatti for Respondent.
Headnotes / Summary
Ss. 11, 16, 17 & 21
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S.265-D
Causing pollution--Imposition of penalty
Effect
Complaint filed against respondent for causing pollution was accepted and a fine of Rs.50,000 was imposed upon the respondent
Court was obliged to follow the procedure laid down in Chapter XXII-A, Cr.P.C. and prior to passing any conviction, charge had to be framed under S.265-D, Cr.P.C.
If accused would plead guilty, it would be compulsory for the court to record the plea and thereafter pass the order of conviction.
Judgment & Decree
For reasons to be recorded later, this complaint is accepted and a fine of Rs. 50,000 is imposed upon the respondent for admittedly causing pollution for eight months. The fine will be deposited in the treasury within 30 days from today. I have consulted learned Member Legal and learned Member Technical regarding quantum of fine to be imposed but they have left the matter to me. (Sd)/- (Sd)/- Khawaja Muhammad Afzal Ch. Khalil (Chairperson) (Member Tech.) Respectfully adds that while passing the above order the procedure laid down in Cr.P.C. has not been correctly followed. It is mandatory upon the courts adjudicating under Criminal Procedure Code to follow the procedure laid down in chapter XXII-A and prior to pass any conviction, charge has to be framed under section 265-D, Cr.P.C., which shall be read over and explained to the accused, and shall be asked whether he pleads guilty or has any defence to make under section 265-E, Cr.P.C. If accused pleads guilty it becomes compulsory for the court to record the plea and thereafter may convict thereon as per its discretion. The worthy Chairperson has not adopted the above mandatory provisions of law prior to announcement of conviction in terms of fine which may be termed as great lacuna. (Sd) /- Ms. Gulzar Butt (Member Legal) H.B.T./13/ET Order accordingly.