YLR 2007

2007 PLP 2264 (YLR)

BAWA MIAN QAZI — Applicant Versus THE STATE and 4 others — Respondents

Jurisdiction / Court
Karachi
Decided Date
Criminal Revision No.36 of 1999 converted into Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.225 of 2004, decided on 8th May, 2007.
Honorable Judges
Rahmat Hussain Jafferi and Muhammad Afzal Soomro, JJ
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2007 PLP 2264 (YLR)
Forum / Court Karachi
Bench Members Rahmat Hussain Jafferi and Muhammad Afzal Soomro, JJ
Parties BAWA MIAN QAZI — Applicant Versus THE STATE and 4 others — Respondents
Primary Law Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2007 PLP 2264 (YLR)?

This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2007 PLP 2264 (YLR)?

The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: Rahmat Hussain Jafferi and Muhammad Afzal Soomro, JJ.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 2007 PLP 2264 (YLR) (BAWA MIAN QAZI — Applicant Versus THE STATE and 4 others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Representation

  • M. A. Kazi for Respondent No.2.
  • Ikram Ahmed Ansari for Respondent No.4.
  • 2. We have heard the parties` Advocates. D.A.-G. is absent. Without going into the merits of the case it is pointed out that under section 24A of General Clauses Act every authority or officer is required to assign reasons for passing an order when a statute authorizes him to pass any order or issue any direction. We have perused the impugned order and found that after giving the details of the case and opinion of the Investigating Officer the learned trial Judge observed as under:

Headnotes / Summary

S. 173

General Clauses Act (X of 1897), S.24-A

Closing of case

Trial Court, after giving details of the case and opinion of Investigating Officer, had observed that the court was satisfied that report of police for closure of the case under S.173, Cr.P.C., being justified, needed to be accepted

No reason whatsoever had been assigned by the court to agree with the report of the police

Court was obliged to have examined report of police and evidence on record and give some reasons concurring with the view taken by Investigating Officer

Under provisions of S.24-A of General Clauses Act, 1897, every Authority or officer was required to assign reasons for passing an order when a statute authorized him to pass any order or issue any direction

Order thus suffered from material illegality by not complying with provisions of S.24-A, of General Clauses Act, 1897, the same was set aside and matter was remanded to the Trial Court for examining the statements of witnesses and record and pass appropriate order as deemed ,fit

Petition was allowed to that extent. Naveedul Haq for Applicant.

Judgment & Decree

RAHMAT HUSSAIN JAFFERI, J.

The present application is directed against the order dated 10-3-1999 passed by the learned Presiding Officer, Special Court (Offences in Banks) Sindh, Karachi by which the report of the F.I.A. Authorities filed under section 173, Cr.P.C. in which a prayer was made for closing the case was accepted by the trial Court.

2. We have heard the parties` Advocates. D.A.-G. is absent. Without going into the merits of the case it is pointed out that under section 24A of General Clauses Act every authority or officer is required to assign reasons for passing an order when a statute authorizes him to pass any order or issue any direction. We have perused the impugned order and found that after giving the details of the case and opinion of the Investigating Officer the learned trial Judge observed as under: "I am satisfied that the report of F.I.A. for closure of the case under section 173, Cr.P.C. is justified and, therefore, accept the' same."

3. Apart from the above paragraph no reason whatsoever has been assigned by the learned Judge to agree with the report of the police. Large number of witnesses were examined. Bank record was produced, therefore, it was incumbent upon learned Judge to have examined such statements, record and give some reasons concurring with the view taken by the Investigating Officer. As the order suffers from material illegality by not complying with provisions of section 24(A) of General Clauses Act, therefore, it is set aside.

4. The matter is remanded to the trial Court for examining the statements of witnesses, record and pass appropriate order as deemed fit.

5. The application is allowed to the above extent. The respondents are on bail. They may continue to remain on bail till the trial Court passes an order within the meaning of section 173(3), Cr.P.C. The application is allowed in the above terms. H.B.T./B-11/K Revision allowed.