1979 P Cr (PLP)
ZAFARULLAH AND ANOTHER-Petitioners Versus THE STATE AND ANOTHER-Respondents
| Citation | 1979 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Mazharul Haq, J |
| Parties | ZAFARULLAH AND ANOTHER-Petitioners Versus THE STATE AND ANOTHER-Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1979 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 1979 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Mazharul Haq, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1979 P Cr (PLP) (ZAFARULLAH AND ANOTHER-Petitioners Versus THE STATE AND ANOTHER-Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Umar Draz for Petitioner.
- Ch. Hafeez Ahmad for Respondent No. 2.
Headnotes / Summary
Ss. 561-A & 249-A-Quashment of proceedings-Contention that facts as disclosed in F.I.R. indicate transaction purely of civil nature and no criminal case made out-Petitioners directed to first apply before trial Court under S. 249-A and make sub missions there. Khushi Muhammad and 4 others v. State 1979 S C M R 94 rel. Dil Muhammad Tarar for the State,
Judgment & Decree
Ss. 561-A & 249-A-Quashment of proceedings-Contention that facts as disclosed in F.I.R. indicate transaction purely of civil nature and no criminal case made out-Petitioners directed to first apply before trial Court under S. 249-A and make sub missions there. Khushi Muhammad and 4 others v. State 1979 S C M R 94 rel. Umar Draz for Petitioner. Ch. Hafeez Ahmad for Respondent No.
2. Dil Muhammad Tarar for the State, Zafarullah and Muhammad Khan petitioners have come up under section 561-A, Cr. P. C. for quashment of a criminal case pending against them in the Court of Mr. Bashir Ahmad Bhatti, Magistrate 1st Class, Chiniot, on the report made by one Shah Muhammad for the offences under section 420/406, P.P.C.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the facts as disclosed in the F.I.R. would indicate that transaction was purely of a, civil nature and no criminal case was made out. Learned counsel for the respondent contended that in the first instance the petitioner should be asked to make these submissions before the trial Court as contemp lated by section 249-A, Cr. P. C. In this regard he relied upon Khushi Muhammad and 4 others v. State (1979 S C M R 94). In view of the cited authority the petitioners are directed to first apply before the trial Court under sec tion 249-A, Cr. P. C. and make their submissions there. With these observations this petition is dismissed. Petition dismissed.