1986 PLP 305 (SCMR)
MUHAMMAD IBRAHIM and others‑‑Petitioners Versus THE STATE and others‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 1986 PLP 305 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Aslam Riaz Hussain, J |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD IBRAHIM and others‑‑Petitioners Versus THE STATE and others‑‑Respondents |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1986 PLP 305 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1986 PLP 305 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Aslam Riaz Hussain, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1986 PLP 305 (SCMR) (MUHAMMAD IBRAHIM and others‑‑Petitioners Versus THE STATE and others‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Zakiuddin Pal, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioners.
- Nisar Ahmad, Advocate Supreme Court for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 20th March, 1985.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑Art. 185(3)‑‑Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898); S. 145‑‑Possession of disputed property regulated by order of a Single Judge of High Court‑‑Subsequently property attached by order of another Judge of same High Court‑‑Petition for leave to appear‑Both matters, Civil Revision and Criminal Revision, arising out of same proceedings under S. 145, Cr.P.C. having been ordered to be heard together in High Court, subsequent order of attachment suspended by Supreme Court with observation that it would be open to High Court to apply its independent mind to both matters and give an independent decision. Shah Muhammad v. Haq Nawaz and another P L D 1970 S C 470 upheld.
Judgment & Decree
Shah Muhammad v. Haq Nawaz and another P L D 1970 S C 470 upheld. Zakiuddin Pal, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioners. Nisar Ahmad, Advocate Supreme Court for Respondents. Date of hearing: 20th March, 1985. This is a case under section 145, Cr.P.C. relying on the case of Shah Muhammad v. Haq Nawaz and another P L D 1970 S C 470 the learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the possession of the property in dispute having been regulated by the learned Single Judge of High Court by his order, dated 5‑1‑1985, the order of attachment of the same property by another learned Single Judge of the same High Court passed subsequently on 27‑1‑1985, was not justified. He, therefore, prays that possession of the property in question should be restored to the petitioner.
2. Learned counsel for the respondent, on the other hand, points out that two matters namely "Civil Revision" and "Criminal Revision" arising out of proceedings under section 145, Cr.P.C. have been ordered to be heard together, therefore, no order should be passed at this stage against an interim order passed by the High Court.
3. After having considered the matter I feel that the judgment in the case of Shah Muhammad (supra) would govern the situation. It is, however, open to the High Court to apply its independent mind to the two matters and give an independent decision. The interim order, dated 27‑1‑1985 is suspended and the property in dispute if attached by the Tehsildar, should be restored to the person from whom the possession was taken. M. I. Order accordingly.