2004 PLP 885 (SCMR)
NASRULLAH KHAN‑‑‑Petitioner Versus MANZOOR HUSSAIN and others‑‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 2004 PLP 885 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Falak Sher and Karamat Nazir Bhandari, JJ |
| Parties | NASRULLAH KHAN‑‑‑Petitioner Versus MANZOOR HUSSAIN and others‑‑‑Respondents |
| Primary Law | Penal Code (XLV of 1860)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2004 PLP 885 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2004 PLP 885 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Falak Sher and Karamat Nazir Bhandari, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2004 PLP 885 (SCMR) (NASRULLAH KHAN‑‑‑Petitioner Versus MANZOOR HUSSAIN and others‑‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ch. M. Ramzan, Advocate Supreme Court with M.A. Qureshi, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 26th February, 2003.
- "8. In the instant case, the learned trial Magistrate has not offered any ground whatsoever for concurring with the police report and it seems as if he had mortgaged his mind in favour of the police. The learned Assistant Advocate‑General, who was present on Court's call, has frankly conceded on the above point.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment dated 30‑3‑2000 passed by the Lahore High Court, Lahore in W.P. No.2987 of 2000). ‑‑‑‑Ss. 420/461/468/471‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)‑‑ Judicial Magistrate had discharged the accused concurring with the police request‑‑‑High Court in exercise of its Constitutional jurisdiction set aside the said order directing entrustment of the investigation of the case to some responsible officer of repute vide the impugned order‑‑-Leave to appeal was sought contending interference with the investigation‑‑‑Contention was ill‑founded, because direction for proper investigation through an independent officer under the supervision of the District Superintendent of Police was unexceptionable‑‑‑Leave to appeal was refused accordingly.
Judgment & Decree
Nemo for Respondents. Date of hearing: 26th February, 2003. FALAK SHER, J.‑‑‑Nasrullah Khan petitioner, Secretary of the Local Union Council, an accused of the‑case registered vide F.I.R. No.537 of 23‑12‑1999 under sections 420, 461, 468, 471, P.P.C. Police Station Saddar Bhakkar on the direction of Assistant Commissioner, Bhakkar having found after enquiring into Muhammad Hussain's application that the alleged fabrication of within mentioned mutations or gift of his mother's estate by his brother Manzoor Hussain, subsequent to her demise with the connivance of the local Revenue Officer, was incorrect and the mutations were genuine, conversely the banked upon death certificate/entries in the death register qua Mst. Ghulam Fatima were forged, inter alia by the petitioner, of which he was discharged by a local Judicial Magistrate concurring with the police request vide order dated 23‑12‑1999, reproduced herein-below:‑‑ "The police record perused. During physical remand of the accused the police has failed to collect any evidence implicating the accused with the present case and the offence initially attributed to him, hence while agreeing with the police report the accused is discharged of the case. On furnishing surety bond to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer, he be released."
2. However, the same was set aside by a learned Judge of the Lahore High Court granting Manzoor Hussain's Writ Petition (No.2987 of 2000), directing entrustment of the investigation to some responsible officer of repute vide the impugned order dated 30‑3‑2002, observing the following:‑ "
8. In the instant case, the learned trial Magistrate has not offered any ground whatsoever for concurring with the police report and it seems as if he had mortgaged his mind in favour of the police. The learned Assistant Advocate‑General, who was present on Court's call, has frankly conceded on the above point.
9. In this view of the matter, I allow this petition, set aside the impugned order and direct S.P., Bhakkar, to depute a senior police officer of good repute serving under his command for investigation of the aforesaid case F.I.R. No. 537, dated 23‑12‑1999 registered at Police Station Saddar Bhakkar. The observation of the Assistant Commissioner should be given due weight. The Investigating Officer to be appointed by S.P. Bhakkar, is directed to conclude the investigation within one month under intimation to this Court and if satisfied that Muhammad Hussain had committed fraud and forgery etc. under the aforesaid offences in connivance with respondent No.3, they should be proceeded against in accordance with law."
3. Against which leave to appeal is being sought contending interference with the investigation.
4. Which, we are afraid is ill‑founded because direction for proper investigation through an independent officer under the supervision of the District Superintendent of Police is unexceptionable. Resultantly, is dismissed, declining leave. N.H.Q./N‑121/S Leave refused.