1972 PLP 234 (SCMR)
Mst. ZOHRAN AND 4 OTHERS‑Petitioners Versus ABDUS SATTAR AND ANOTHER‑Respondents
| Citation | 1972 PLP 234 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | Mst. ZOHRAN AND 4 OTHERS‑Petitioners Versus ABDUS SATTAR AND ANOTHER‑Respondents |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1972 PLP 234 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1972 PLP 234 (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: 1972 PLP 234 (SCMR) (Mst. ZOHRAN AND 4 OTHERS‑Petitioners Versus ABDUS SATTAR AND ANOTHER‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing : 12th May 1972.
- S.M. Rashid, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Rao Muhammad Yusaf Khan, Advocate‑on‑Record for, Petitioners..
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of Punjab, Lahore, dated the 17th March 1972, in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 96/Q of.1971). Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 561‑A‑Quashment of criminal proceedings‑Judge of High Court directing investigation by Police of a criminal case against Z‑Investigation undertaken by Police but Z found to be innocent‑S thereafter, filing private complaint against Z and Magistrate summoning Z‑Z moving High Court for quashment of proceeding on ground that police had already made investigation and found Z innocent‑High Court refusing interference holding that private complaint did not suffer any legal defect and complainant was not precluded in law from filing private complaint after Z had been discharged on Police report -Order of High Court, held, justified‑Special Leave to Appeal refused by Supreme Court. S.M. Rashid, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Rao Muhammad Yusaf Khan, Advocate‑on‑Record for, Petitioners..
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD YAQUB ALI, Actg. C. J.‑A case was registered against the petitioners under section 364/380, P. P. C. at the Police Station, Kupp, Multan, under the directions of a learned Judge of the erstwhile High Court of West Pakistan. Investigation was undertaken by the Crimes Branch Police which found the petitioners innocent and consequent upon it the case was cancelled. Thereafter the respondent filed a private complaint in the Court of a Magistrate against the petitioners under section 364/380, P. P. C. for kidnapping his daughter Mst. Sughran so that she may be murdered and for theft. After recording the statement of the complainant and preliminary evidence produced by him, the Magistrate formed the opinion that there was sufficient ground for proceeding with the complaint and issued summonses to the petitioners under bailable warrants. Aggrieved by the order of the Magistrate, the petitioners moved the High Court under section 561, Cr. P. C., for quashment of the proceedings on the ground that the Police had already held investigation in the case and found them innocent. The petition was dismissed by a learned Judge in the view that none of the conditions for quashment was made out. The complaint did not suffer from any legal defect, the Court which summoned the petitioners had, jurisdiction in the matter and it was not shown that the prosecution was mala fide. Nor the respondent was, in law, precluded from filing a private complaint after the petitioners had been discharged on the report made by the police. The petitioners seek leave to appeal reiterating the plea that in view of the report submitted by the Crimes Branch on which the petitioners were discharged and the case registered against them was cancelled, the Magistrate ought not to have summoned them. On the statement made by the complainant, father of the abductee, and the preliminary evidence, the trial Court has so far formed the opinion that it is a fit case for further proceedings. Unless sufficient material is brought on the record by the defence to indicate that the charge against them is false or that the complaint is mala fide it would be unjust to dismiss the complaint without having examined the evidence which the complainant proposes to lead in support of the accusations contained in it. No proper, ground was, therefore, made out for quashment of the proceedings against the petitioners. The petition is dismissed. Leave refused.