2007 PLP 1080 (MLD)
AJAL KHAN — Applicant Versus BAHARUDDIN KERIO and 5 others — Respondents
| Citation | 2007 PLP 1080 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | AJAL KHAN — Applicant Versus BAHARUDDIN KERIO and 5 others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2007 PLP 1080 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2007 PLP 1080 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2007 PLP 1080 (MLD) (AJAL KHAN — Applicant Versus BAHARUDDIN KERIO and 5 others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- ----S. 200 ---Dismissal of direct complaint---Direct complaint under S.200, Cr.P.C. was dismissed by the Trial Court on sole ground that Entry No.20 in Roznamcha of police station concerned had clearly disclosed that action taken by the police party to apprehend absconding accused was a justified action---Applicant had alleged that while holding so the whole evidence adduced by the applicant in the proceedings of preliminary enquiry was ignored by the Trial Court in a slipshod manner and even entry No.21 showing the arrest of 4/5 other persons by the raiding police party was also overlooked--Additional Advocate General, when confronted with said facts, was unable to controvert that illegal arrest of 4/5 other persons had taken place at the hands of police functionaries who were among the raiding party---Facts had shown that substantial material was brought on record by the applicant for bringing his complaint under S.200, Cr.P.C. against said functionaries---Impugned order whereby complaint was dismissed, was set aside with direction for taking further proceedings in the matter in accordance with law.
- Mr. Masood A. Noorani, Additional Advocate General Sindh, when confronted with these facts, is unable to controvert that illegal arrest of 4/5 other persons had taken place at the hands of Respondents, who were among the police party, which had raided the house of the Applicant on 14-3-2006.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 200
Direct complaint under S.200, Cr.P.C. was dismissed by the Trial Court on sole ground that Entry No.20 in Roznamcha of police station concerned had clearly disclosed that action taken by the police party to apprehend absconding accused was a justified action
Applicant had alleged that while holding so the whole evidence adduced by the applicant in the proceedings of preliminary enquiry was ignored by the Trial Court in a slipshod manner and even entry No.21 showing the arrest of 4/5 other persons by the raiding police party was also overlooked--Additional Advocate General, when confronted with said facts, was unable to controvert that illegal arrest of 4/5 other persons had taken place at the hands of police functionaries who were among the raiding party
Facts had shown that substantial material was brought on record by the applicant for bringing his complaint under S.200, Cr.P.C. against said functionaries
Impugned order whereby complaint was dismissed, was set aside with direction for taking further proceedings in the matter in accordance with law.
Judgment & Decree
ANWAR ZAHEER TAMALI, J.
Mr. Irfan Ahmed Qureshi, learned counsel for the Applicant submits that the direct complaint under section 200, Cr.P.C., filed by the Applicant, was dismissed by the Court of IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Nawabshah on the sole ground that Entry No.20 in the Roznamcha of Police Station Tangwani had clearly disclosed that action taken by the police party to apprehend the absconding accused in Crime No. 105 of 2003, under section 302, P.P.C. of Police Station A-Section Kandhkot, District Kashmore was a justified action. He submits that while holding so the whole evidence adduced by the Applicant in the proceedings of preliminary enquiry was ignored by the learned trial Court in a slipshod manner, and even the Entry No.21, showing the arrest of 4/5 other persons by the raiding police party was overlooked. He further takes reference to the reply of this Criminal Revision Application submitted by Respondent No.1, wherein he has also admitted that at the time when they had raided the houses of the Applicant and others for arrest of proclaimed offender Arbello, he had also arrested 4/5 other persons, who were later on released and not challaned in the crime. Mr. Masood A. Noorani, Additional Advocate General Sindh, when confronted with these facts, is unable to controvert that illegal arrest of 4/5 other persons had taken place at the hands of Respondents, who were among the police party, which had raided the house of the Applicant on 14-3-2006. I have carefully considered the submissions of learned counsel and perused the impugned as well as the evidence led by the applicant's side during P.E., which shows that substantial material was brought on record by the Applicant for bringing his complaint under section 200 Cr.P.C. on record against the Respondents. Accordingly, the impugned order, dated 3-6-2006 is set aside and the complaint of the Applicant under section 200, Cr.P.C. is brought on record of the trial Court with directions for further proceedings in the matter in accordance with law. This Criminal Revision Application stands disposed of in the above terms. H.B.T./A-48/K Order accordingly.