1994 PLP 1804 (MLD)
MUHAMMAD NAJEEB — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 1994 PLP 1804 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Shariat Court (AJ&K) |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD NAJEEB — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | (a) Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1994 PLP 1804 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: (a) Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1994 PLP 1804 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Shariat Court (AJ&K) bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1994 PLP 1804 (MLD) (MUHAMMAD NAJEEB — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ch. Muhammad Azam Khan for Petitioner.
- 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the First Appellate Court has committed an error in law in dismissing the appeal of the petitioner in default of appearance, because a criminal appeal once admitted for regular hearing cannot be disposed of only on merits. The learned Assistant Advocate General as well as the learned counsel for the complainant supported the proposition raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 18/10
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), Ss. 421, 422 & 423-- Appeal dismissed for non-prosecution
First Appellate Court after having admitted the appeal of accused for regular hearing could not under the law dismiss the same for non-prosecution
Such order of the Appellate Court was set aside and the case was remanded for disposal on merits after hearing the parties.
Ss. 421, 422, & 423
Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance (VII of 1979), S. 18/10
Dismissed of appeal for non-prosecution
First Appellate Court under Criminal Procedure Code has no powers like those contained in Civil Procedure Code to dismiss the appeal in default of appearance of accused
Under Criminal Procedure Code an appeal having survived the stage of summary dismissal under S.121, Cr.P.C. enters the stage of Ss.422 & 423, Cr.P.C. which demands an examination of the record by the Appellate Court in order to resolve the points of law and facts raised in appeal.
Judgment & Decree
The facts giving rise to the present revision are that a challan under section 10 of Enforcement of Zina and Hudood Act was presented by Police Station Afzalpur before Additional Tehsil Court of Criminal Jurisdiction, Mirpur on August 20, 1990.
2. After due trial by the trial Court the accused petitioner vide order passed on May 26, 1993 was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and six months under sections 10 and 18 of the Enforcement of Zina and Hudood Act. However, the accused was held entitled to avail the benefit of section 382-B of the Criminal Procedure Code.
4. The accused petitioner preferred an appeal before the District Court of Criminal Jurisdiction, Mirpur on June 16, 1993. While admitting this appeal for regular hearing, notice was issued to public prosecutor and the record of the trial Court was sent for. However, on November 27, 1993, the petitioner as well as his counsel failed to appear in the Court when the case was called for hearing. The first appellate Court dismissed the appeal summarily for want of prosecution. This order has been assailed in the present revision petition.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner argued that the First Appellate Court has committed an error in law in dismissing the appeal of the petitioner in default of appearance, because a criminal appeal once admitted for regular hearing cannot be disposed of only on merits. The learned Assistant Advocate General as well as the learned counsel for the complainant supported the proposition raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner.
6. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.
7. Admittedly the appeal of the petitioner against an order of conviction passed against him by Tehsil Court of Criminal Jurisdiction, Mirpur was admitted for regular hearing, which was dismissed on November 27, 1993 in default of appearance of the petitioner as well as his counsel. The First Appellate Court, under Criminal Procedure Code had no powers like those contained in Civil Procedure Code to dismiss the appeal in default of the appearance of the petitioner-appellant. Under Criminal Procedure Code an appeal having survived the stage of summary dismissal under section 421 enters the stage of sections 422 and 423 of the Criminal Procedure Code which demands an examination of the record by the appellate Court in order to resolve the point of law and fact raised in appeal. In the light of the above observation I accept this revision petition and set aside the impugned order passed by the District Court of Criminal Jurisdiction, Mirpur on November 27, 1993 and remand the case to the said Court with the direction that the appeal of the petitioner be heard and I disposed of on merits. N.H.Q./5/Sh.CA. Case remanded.