2006 PLP 2772 (YLR)
GHULAM HAIDER — Petitioner Versus ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE, and others — Respondents
| Citation | 2006 PLP 2772 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Khawaja Muhammad Sharif, J |
| Parties | GHULAM HAIDER — Petitioner Versus ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE, and others — Respondents |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2006 PLP 2772 (YLR)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2006 PLP 2772 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Khawaja Muhammad Sharif, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2006 PLP 2772 (YLR) (GHULAM HAIDER — Petitioner Versus ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE, and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Zia Ullah Khan Niazi for Petitioner.
- Saif-ul-Haq Ziay for Respondent No. 2.
- 2. On the other learned counsel for respondent No.2 submits that learned Additional Sessions Judge who is also justice of peace is competent to direct the police to add or delete any offence on the _ application of any of the party because learned Additional Sessions Judge is competent to hear the case; that from bare perusal of F.I.R. offence under section 354-A, P.P.C. and offence under section 18 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, VII of 1979 are made out and no illegality has been committed by learned Additional Sessions Judge.
- 3. Learned Additional Advocate-General submits that Additional Sessions Judge having power of justice of peace has no authority to direct the police to add or delete any offence. It is prerogative of police after recording F.I.R., statements of witnesses recorded user section 161, Cr.P.C. and other material available on record to add or delete the offence.
Headnotes / Summary
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
Ss. 22-A & 22-B
Prerogative of Trial Court at the time of framing of charge only that it could add or delete any offence, if it was made out from the facts
Additional Sessions Judge having powers of Justice of Peace, had no authority to direct the Police to add or delete any offence. Khizer Hayat and others v. Inspector-General of Police PLD 2005 Lah.470 ref. Ch. Muhammad Hanif Khatana Add1.A.-G. along with Najeeb Ullah, A.S.-I.
Judgment & Decree
KHAWAJA MUHAMMAD SHARIF, J.
In continuation of my order dated 20-12-2005, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that learned Additional Sessions Judge with power of justice of peace has no authority to direct the police to add or delete any offence during the course of investigation. He has relied upon Khizer Hayat and others v. Inspector General of Police (PLD 2005 Lahore 470), relevant head note-X at pages 480 and 481.
2. On the other learned counsel for respondent No.2 submits that learned Additional Sessions Judge who is also justice of peace is competent to direct the police to add or delete any offence on the _ application of any of the party because learned Additional Sessions Judge is competent to hear the case; that from bare perusal of F.I.R. offence under section 354-A, P.P.C. and offence under section 18 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, VII of 1979 are made out and no illegality has been committed by learned Additional Sessions Judge.
3. Learned Additional Advocate-General submits that Additional Sessions Judge having power of justice of peace has no authority to direct the police to add or delete any offence. It is prerogative of police after recording F.I.R., statements of witnesses recorded user section 161, Cr.P.C. and other material available on record to add or delete the offence. 4. 1 have heard learned counsel for the parties. I have gone through the judgment cited by learned counsel for the petitioner. In fact it is only prerogative of learned trial. Court at the time of framing of charge, can add or delete any offence if it is made out or otherwise. From the perusal of F.I.R., report under section 173, Cr.P.C. and other material available on record, both the parties have right to address the arguments at the time of framing of charge. I am in agreement with the learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Additional A.-G. that learned Additional Sessions Judge having power of justice of peace has no authority to direct the police to add or delete any offence. Learned counsel for the petitioner has rightly relied upon judgment of Full Bench of this Court, reported in PLD 2005 Lahore 470 relevant head-note at pages 480-481. In this view of the matter, this petition is accepted and impugned order is set aside. H.B.T./G-45/L ?????????????????????????? Petition accepted.