1968 P Cr (PLP)
MUHAMMAD ABDUL JALIL‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑Respondent
| Citation | 1968 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | |
| Bench Members | A. R. Cornelius, C. J. and Muhammad Yaqub Ali, J |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD ABDUL JALIL‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1968 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1968 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the bench comprising: A. R. Cornelius, C. J. and Muhammad Yaqub Ali, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1968 P Cr (PLP) (MUHAMMAD ABDUL JALIL‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Hamid Ali Khan Sherwani, Advocate Supreme Court instruct ed by Masood Akhtar Sheikh, Attorney for Petitioner.
- Date of hearing: 8th December 1967.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of West Pakistan, Lahore, dated the 13th September 1967, in Cr, Misc. No, 2868 of 1967).
S. 526‑Transfer of criminal cage from one Magistrate to another declined by High Court‑Leave to appeal sought against High Court's order‑Ques tions pertaining to transfer of criminal cases, held, must ordinarily be determined finally within jurisdiction of High Court‑Petition dismissed, however subject to observation that, in special circum stances of case, it would have been safer to transfer case to Court of another Magistrate‑‑‑ Constitution of Pakistan (1962), Art. 58(3). Nemo for the State.
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD YAQUB ALI, J.‑The petitioner seeks leave to appeal from the order of the High Court declining to transfer a criminal case pending against him in the Court of a local Magistrate. Questions pertaining to transfer of criminal cases under section 526 of the Code of Criminal Procedure must ordinarily be, determined finally within the jurisdiction of the High Court. We, therefore, refuse leave to appeal though it may be observed usefully that so much prejudice must have been caused by the successive applications made by the petitioner for transfer of the case and the assertion by the Presiding Officer that some of his disgruntled relations have joined hands with the petitioner in putting forth the grounds on which transfer applications were based that it would have been safer to transfer the case to the Court of another Magistrate of competent jurisdiction. Subject to what has been said above the petition is dismissed.