2008 P Cr (PLP)
IJAZ AHMED — Petitioner Versus THE STATE and 2 others — Respondents
| Citation | 2008 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | IJAZ AHMED — Petitioner Versus THE STATE and 2 others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2008 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2008 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2008 P Cr (PLP) (IJAZ AHMED — Petitioner Versus THE STATE and 2 others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Shoaib Zafar for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 526
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.302/34, 109 & 404
Petitioner/complainant had sought transfer of criminal case to some other court of competent jurisdiction on the ground that judicial officer in the case had already acquitted four of accused persons; and that petitioner apprehended that remaining accused who had been put to trial, would also be acquitted
Ground taken by petitioner for transfer of case had no force because case of each accused was to be decided on merits
Role attributed to acquitted co-accused was that of abetment, whereas the role attributed to the respondent was of actively participating in the occurrence and the Trial Court would decide case strictly on merits after complying with all the legal formalities
Transfer of case was declined.
Judgment & Decree
MIAN MUHAMMAD NAJAM-UZ-ZAMAN, J.
Petitioner is complainant of case F.I.R. No.71 of 2006 dated 8-3-2005 for the offence under sections 302/34/109/404, P.P.C. registered at Police Station Midh Ranjha, Tehsil Bhalwal pending in the Court of Mr. Qaiser Nazir Butt, Additional Sessions Judge, Bhalwal District Sargodha and through this petition prayer has been made for transfer of the same to some other Court of competent jurisdiction, on the ground that the said judicial officer has already acquitted four of the co-accused and petitioner apprehends that remaining accused who have been put to trial would also be acquitted.
2. I am afraid the contention raised by learned counsel has no force because case of each accused is to be decided on merits and admittedly the role attributed to the acquitted co-accused was that of abetment whereas the role attributed to respondents Nos.3 and 4 is of actively participating in the occurrence, I am sanguine that the trial Court will decide the case strictly on merits after complying with all the legal formalities. This petition having no merits stand dismissed. H.B.T./I-8/L Petition dismissed.