1989 PLP 500 (SCMR)
SARDAR KHAN — Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD HANIF and others — Respondents
| Citation | 1989 PLP 500 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Javid Iqbal, JJ |
| Parties | SARDAR KHAN — Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD HANIF and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 PLP 500 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1989 PLP 500 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Javid Iqbal, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 PLP 500 (SCMR) (SARDAR KHAN — Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD HANIF and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Yusuf Ali Khan, Bar-at-Law, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by S. Inayat Hussain, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 27th November, 1988.
- Yusuf Ali Khan, Bar‑at‑Law, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by S. Inayat Hussain, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the Lahore High Court, Lahore dated 7th October, 1984 in W.P. No.3263 of 1984).
S. 439-A--Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.307/109/148/149/506--Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Arts. 185(3) & 199--Leave to appeal granted to examine the questions whether by omission to frame a charge alone, the acquittal could have been set aside on the asking of the complainant party; whether the Sessions Court had no jurisdiction to set aside acquittal and order re-trial under S. 439-A, Cr.P.C. and whether the High Court judgment notwithstanding any legal defect should be disturbed.
Judgment & Decree
JAVID IQBAL, J.‑‑This petition for leave is directed against judgment of the Lahore High Court, Lahore dated 7th October, 1984 whereby writ petition of the respondents was accepted. Briefly the facts are that a case was registered against the respondents under section 307/109/148/149/506, P.P.C., but they were acquitted of the aforesaid charges by Magistrate Section 30, Jhang. Thereupon the petitioner i.e. complainant side brought a revision petition before the Additional Sessions Judge who arrived at the conclusion that since the trial Court had recorded the evidence without framing any charge against the accused persons, the trial had been vitiated. He, therefore, remanded the case to the Magistrate with the direction that charge be framed and evidence be recorded afresh. The accused party then challenged the aforesaid order by way of writ petition which was accepted as stated above. Hence the present petition by the petitioner complainant. After hearing learned counsel at some length we grant leave in this case to examine the following questions:‑‑ (i) Whether by omission to frame a charge, alone the acquittal could have been set aside on the asking of the complainant party; (ii) Whether the Sessions Court had no jurisdiction to set aside acquittal and order retrial under section 439‑AT Cr.P.C. and , (iii) Whether the High Court judgment notwithstanding any legal defect should be disturbed. M.A.K./S‑219/S Leave granted.