PCRLJ 1968

1968 P Cr (PLP)

COMMISSIONER; KHAIRPUR DIVISION AND ANOTHER‑Petitioners Versus ALI SHER SARKI‑Respondent

Jurisdiction / Court
Supreme Court
Decided Date
2nd February 1968
Honorable Judges
Fazle‑Akbar and Muhammad Yaqub Ali, JJ
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 1968 P Cr (PLP)
Forum / Court Supreme Court
Bench Members Fazle‑Akbar and Muhammad Yaqub Ali, JJ
Parties COMMISSIONER; KHAIRPUR DIVISION AND ANOTHER‑Petitioners Versus ALI SHER SARKI‑Respondent
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
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 Supreme Court bench comprising: Fazle‑Akbar and Muhammad Yaqub Ali, JJ.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 1968 P Cr (PLP) (COMMISSIONER; KHAIRPUR DIVISION AND ANOTHER‑Petitioners Versus ALI SHER SARKI‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Representation

  • Kazi Akhtar Ahmad, Additional Advocate‑General West Pakistan Karachi instructed by Shafiq Ahmad, Senior Attorney for Petitioners.
  • Nemo for Respondent.

Headnotes / Summary

Ss. 18 & 13‑Whether during pendency of appeal under S. 18 from order under S. 13, the Divisional Commissioner has power to suspend or modify order of TribunalSpecial Leave to Appeal granted by Supreme Court to consider question.

Judgment & Decree

Ss. 18 & 13‑Whether during pendency of appeal under S. 18 from order under S. 13, the Divisional Commissioner has power to suspend or modify order of TribunalSpecial Leave to Appeal granted by Supreme Court to consider question. Kazi Akhtar Ahmad, Additional Advocate‑General West Pakistan Karachi instructed by Shafiq Ahmad, Senior Attorney for Petitioners. Nemo for Respondent. Date of hearing : 2nd February 1968. MUHAMMAD YAQUB ALI, J.‑The question raised in this petition for special leave to appeal moved by the State is whether during the pendency of an appeal from an order under section 13 of the West Pakistan (Control of Goondas) Ordinance, 1959 the Divisional Commissioner has the power to suspend or modify the order of the Tribunal. The Commissioner considered that he was not vested with such s power, but the High Court has, on the analogy of its own revisional jurisdiction come to a contrary conclusion and held that during the pendency of an appeal the Commissioner can pass an order suspending or modifying the order of the Tribunal. The State disputes the construction of the High Court on the ground that the power to suspend or modify an order pending the hearing of the appeal cannot be implied, but must be specifically conferred on the appellate authority. The question raised is of general public importance and involves interpretation of section 18 of the West Pakistan (Control of Goondas) Ordinance, 1959. We accordingly grant leave to appeal. Petition accepted.