1969 PLP 188 (SCMR)
DR. AHMAD GHULAM MUHAMMAD, CIVIL SURGEON, CIVIL HOSPITAL, LYALLPUR AND ANOTHER‑Petitioners Versus THE STATE‑Respondent
| Citation | 1969 PLP 188 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | DR. AHMAD GHULAM MUHAMMAD, CIVIL SURGEON, CIVIL HOSPITAL, LYALLPUR AND ANOTHER‑Petitioners Versus THE STATE‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1969 PLP 188 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1969 PLP 188 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1969 PLP 188 (SCMR) (DR. AHMAD GHULAM MUHAMMAD, CIVIL SURGEON, CIVIL HOSPITAL, LYALLPUR AND ANOTHER‑Petitioners Versus THE STATE‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Muhammad Abdullah Bajwa, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Ghulam Mujtaba Chaudhri, Attorney for Petitioners.
- Date of hearing : 29th October 1968:
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of West Pakistan, Lahore, dated the 21st December 1966, in Criminal Appeal No. 288 of 1966).
S. 476‑fhether jurisdiction under S. 476 rightly exercised by High Court in circumstances of case‑Special Leave to Appeal granted by Supreme Court to consider question. Nemo for the State.
Judgment & Decree
S. 476‑fhether jurisdiction under S. 476 rightly exercised by High Court in circumstances of case‑Special Leave to Appeal granted by Supreme Court to consider question. Muhammad Abdullah Bajwa, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Ghulam Mujtaba Chaudhri, Attorney for Petitioners. Nemo for the State. Date of hearing : 29th October 1968: MUHAMMAD YAQUB ALI, J.‑This petition for leave to appeal from the order of the High Court directing that a complaint under sections 193 and 218, P. P. C. been filed against the two petitioners is barred by 318 days. It is pointed out that no notice was issued by the High Court to the petitioners before deciding to prosecute them for giving false evidence in the case relating to the murder of one Muhammad Saeed and for preparing false record. The petitioners had appeared as prosecution witnesses in the trial Court and were not present at the hearing of the murder reference in the High Court. Consequently they had no notice of the impugned order to move this petition in time. The ground raised in the petition finds support from the judgment of the High Court. Leave to appeal is granted to consider whether jurisdiction under section 476, Cr. P. C., has been legally exercised by the High Court in this case. Delay in filing the petition for special leave to appeal is subject to just exceptions condoned. Leave granted.