1989 PLP 4676(1) (MLD)
MUNAWAR HUSSAIN ‑‑‑ Appellant Versus THE FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN‑‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1989 PLP 4676(1) (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | M. Mehboob Ahmad and Muhammad Arif, JJ |
| Parties | MUNAWAR HUSSAIN ‑‑‑ Appellant Versus THE FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN‑‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 PLP 4676(1) (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 1989 PLP 4676(1) (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: M. Mehboob Ahmad and Muhammad Arif, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 PLP 4676(1) (MLD) (MUNAWAR HUSSAIN ‑‑‑ Appellant Versus THE FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN‑‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Syed Shabbar Raza Rizvi for Appellant.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑S.86‑A‑‑Transfer of accused‑‑Accused was arrested for handing over to Tribal Authorities‑‑Procedure laid down in section 86‑A Cr.P.C. should 6e strictly complied with‑‑High Court issued directions on assurance from the State counsel. Khawaja Khalid Pervez v. Federation of Islamic Republic and 7 others P L D 1987 Lah. 323 ref. Muhammad Hafeez Qureshi Standing Counsel for Federal Government.
Judgment & Decree
M. MAHBOOB AHMAD, J‑‑The learned Standing Counsel states that the provisions contained in section 86‑A of the Code of Criminal Procedure are mandatory and he sees no reason why the appellant would be handed over to the Tribal Authorities without adhering to the provisions contained in the section aforementioned. He further submits that as held in Khawaja Khalid Pervez v. Federation of Islamic Republic and 7 others (P L D 1987 Lah. 323) the person arrested under section 85 Cr.P.C. If he has to be removed in custody to any place in the Tribal Area, is to be produced before a Magistrate within the local limits of whose jurisdiction the arrest is made. He undertakes to ensure that the provisions of section 86‑A would be strictly complied with before the appellant is handed over to the Tribal Authorities. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that he would be satisfied if the undertaking given by the learned Standing Counsel that provisions of section 86‑A will be complied with before any further action is taken against the appellant is carried out. That being so, this appeal is disposed of having borne fruit on the statement of the learned Standing Counsel. Copy of the order may be given dasti as prayed for by the learned counsel for the appellant on payment of usual charges. SA./M‑1634/L Observation given.