1982 PLP 885 (SCMR)
EJAZ AKHTAR-Petitioner Versus THE STATE-Respondent
| Citation | 1982 PLP 885 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | -- Art. 185(3)-Delay-Condonation - Contention that petitioner having been suffering from eyesore could not secure certified copy of impugned order in time hence delay in filing petition for leave to appeal be condoned-Suffering from eyesore, held, hardly a reason for delay of over a month in filing petition.-Delay. |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | EJAZ AKHTAR-Petitioner Versus THE STATE-Respondent |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1982 PLP 885 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1982 PLP 885 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the -- Art. 185(3)-Delay-Condonation - Contention that petitioner having been suffering from eyesore could not secure certified copy of impugned order in time hence delay in filing petition for leave to appeal be condoned-Suffering from eyesore, held, hardly a reason for delay of over a month in filing petition.-Delay. bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1982 PLP 885 (SCMR) (EJAZ AKHTAR-Petitioner Versus THE STATE-Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Manzoor Ellahi, Advocate Supreme Court and M. Kowkab Iqbal, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner.
- Date of hearing : 3rd March, 1982.
- Manzoor Ellahi, Advocate Supreme Court and M. Kowkab Iqbal, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
(Against the judgment and order dated 4-10-1981 of the Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 11-Q of 1981). -- Art. 185(3)-Delay-Condonation - Contention that petitioner having been suffering from eyesore could not secure certified copy of impugned order in time hence delay in filing petition for leave to appeal be condoned-Suffering from eyesore, held, hardly a reason for delay of over a month in filing petition.-[Delay]. Nemo for the State.
Judgment & Decree
M. BURHANUDDIN KHAN, J.‑This is a petition for special leave to appeal against the order/judgment dated 4‑10‑1981 of the Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench in Cr. M. No. 11‑Q/81 whereby the petitioner's application under section 561‑A, Cr. P. C. was dismissed.
2. It may be mentioned that the petition is barred by 33 days. The petitioner has filed an application for the condonation of delay stating therein that as he was suffering from eyesore and, therefore, he could not secure the certified copy of the impugned order in time. This could hardly be a reason for the delay of over a month in filing the present petition.
3. The petitioner filed an application for the quashment of the proceed ings in the Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench, but the same was dismissed on 4‑10‑1981. Feeling aggrieved the petitioner filed the present petition on 13‑12‑1981. No valid or reasonable cause is shown for the delay in filing this petition which is hopelessly time barred and is accordingly dismissed. Petition dismissed.