1993 P Cr (PLP)
ABDUR REHMAN and 3 others — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 1993 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | ABDUR REHMAN and 3 others — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1993 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1993 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: 1993 P Cr (PLP) (ABDUR REHMAN and 3 others — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 561-A
Accused were declared innocent by. Magistrate who had discharged them, but subsequently case of accused was re investigated and a report was submitted by Police under S.173, Cr.P.C.-- Additional Sessions Judge on basis of such report had taken cognizance of matter and decided to proceed against accused and issued coercive processes against them
Revision petition was also pending against earlier order of Magistrate according to which accused were discharged
Inherent jurisdiction of High Court, could not be invoked to bring about a result in respect of which there was an express prohibition or express provision in Code of Criminal Procedure or any other law
Petition for quashing of proceedings against order in a case which was open to revision before Federal Shariat Court, was not sustainable.
Judgment & Decree
Piral alias Pir Bux's case 1992 P Cr. L J 1842 and Syed Waqar Hussain Shah's case P L D 1988 Lah. 666 ref. Malik Ghulam Farid for the Petitioners. Malik Muhammad Aslam for the Complainant. Nasir-ud-Din Ghauri for the State. Date of hearing: 14th June, 1993. This is the petition under section 561-A, Cr.P.C. for the quashment of criminal proceedings pending against the petitioners in the Court of Mr. Riaz- ul-Hasan Alvi, Additional Sessions Judge, Bahawalpur who has issued warrants of arrest against them on the basis of challan submitted before him.
2. Initially the petitioners were opined as innocent and the Magistrate had discharged them. Subsequently the case was re-investigated by the Superintendent of Police, Crime Branch, whereby Mst. Nadia Yasmin and Shabbir were challaned as accused. The petitioners, however, were not found connected with the offence. But the learned Additional Sessions Judge had already taken cognizance of the matter on the basis of report under section 173, Cr.P.C. submitted on the 30th of September, 1992 wherein the petitioners had also been shown as witnesses. Subsequently challan was also submitted on the 17th of October, 1992 wherein the petitioners were placed in Column No.2. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, however, on the basis of the said challan decided to proceed against the petitioners and issued coercive processes against them. A revision petition is also pending against the order of the Magistrate before the learned Additional Sessions Judge which apparently was entertainable only in the Shariat Court in Hudood cases. Inherent jurisdiction of this Court cannot be invoked to bring about a result in respect of which there is an express prohibition or express provision in Code of Criminal Procedure or any other law. A quashment petition against the order in Hudood case which was open to revision before the Federal Shariat Court is not sustainable. So, was also ruled by the Sindh High Court in Piral alias Pir Bux's case reported as 1992 P Cr. L J 1842. Even on merits, the learned Additional Sessions Judge was competent to summon the accused placed in Column No.2 who had earned discharge through an executive order of the Illaqa Magistrate. For this I solicit support from Syed Waqar Hussain Shah's case cited at P L D 1988 Lah.
666. In the circumstances the petition under section 561-A, Cr.P.C. is dismissed. H.B.T./A-442/L Petition dismissed.