2003 P Cr (PLP)
IJAZ AHMAD — Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD AZAM — Respondent
| Citation | 2003 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | IJAZ AHMAD — Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD AZAM — Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2003 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2003 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2003 P Cr (PLP) (IJAZ AHMAD — Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD AZAM — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Muhammad Shan Gul for petitioner.
- Muhammad Ismaeel Qureshy for Respondent No. 1.
- Muhammad Hanif Khatana, Additional Advocate-General.
- 2. On the other hand, learned Additional Advocate-General very candidly concedes the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and has also drawn my intention to section 196, Cr.P.C.
Headnotes / Summary
Ss. 196 & 561-A
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.295-A & 295-C-- Quashing of proceedings
Contention of complainant was that in fact the complaint was filed under S.295-C, P.P.C. against accused and his co-accused, but the Magistrate after inquiry had submitted a report that case under S.295-A, P.P.C. was made out, which conclusion was incorrect and that case made out against him and his co-accused under S.295-A, P.P.C. was not cognizable by the Court
No Court under provisions of S.196, Cr.P.C. could take cognizance of any offence punishable under Chap. VI, P.P.C. (Offences against the State) and specially under S.295-A, P.P.C. wherein the accused had been summoned by Trial Court
Proceedings before Trial Court were quashed, in circumstances.
Judgment & Decree
Muhammad Shan Gul for petitioner. Muhammad Ismaeel Qureshy for Respondent No.
1. Muhammad Hanif Khatana, Additional Advocate-General. Date of hearing: 22nd April, 2003. In continuation of my order dated 28-3-2003, learned counsel for the complainant submits that in fact the complaint was filed under section 295-C, P.P.C. against the present petitioner and his co-accused but the learned Magistrate after inquiry submitted a report that case under section 295-A is made out, that learned Magistrate was wrong in holding this fact after recording the preliminary evidence, that bare perusal of the complaint and the statements of the witnesses show that case under section 295-C, P.P.C. is made out and not under section 295-A, P.P.C. He has relied upon 1993 SCMR 1718 and has also read before Article 203 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan.
2. On the other hand, learned Additional Advocate-General very candidly concedes the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioner and has also drawn my intention to section 196, Cr.P.C.
3. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. For the just decision of the case, I would like to reproduce section 196, Cr.P.C. as under:
196 Prosecution for offences against the State.
No Court shall take cognizance of any offence punishable under Chapter VI or IX-A of the Pakistan Penal Code (except section 127), or punishable under section 108-A, or section 153-A, or section 294-A or section 295-A or section 505 of the same Code, unless upon complaint made by order of, or under authority from the Central Government, or the Provincial Government concerned, or some .officer empowered in this behalf by either of two Governments". The bare perusal of abovesaid section would show that no Court can take cognizance of any offence punishable under chapter which has been mentioned there and specifically section 295-A, P.P.C. in which the petitioner has been summoned by the learned trial Court. After having gone through the abovesaid section, this petition is accepted and the proceedings are hereby quashed. H.B.T./I-191/L Petition accepted