Acquittal before trial
Acquittal before trial legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.
Meaning & Judicial Interpretation: (اردو مفہوم اور قانونی تشریح)
Accused persons availed various loans from complainant bank and on default of payment of loan, bank filed complaint under S.20 of Financial Institutions (Recovery of Finances) Ordinance, 2001
On application filed by accused persons, Trial Court acquitted them in exercise of powers under S.265-K, Cr.P.C.
Validity
All liabilities against alleged misappropriation were admitted by co-accused, who was real beneficiary of the deal
Bank had already filed similar nature of complaint on 17-1-2001 and after its dismissal on 4-9-2002, bank kept mum from the date of dismissal till filing of present complaint
Bank failed to render any reason for filing second complaint after lapse of seven years
No appeal or application against order of dismissal was preferred
Complaint in question also amounted to double jeopardy, which was against S.403, Cr.P.C. and also against Art.13 of the Constitution
High Court did not find any probability of conviction of accused persons for alleged offence, even if prosecution would have allowed to produce evidence against them
Charge levied against accused persons being without substance and groundless, therefore, Trial Court had rightly acquitted accused persons under S.265-K, Cr.P.C., which needed no interference
Appeal was dismissed in circumstances.
"Acquittal before trial", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/124939562
Precedents & Case Laws citing "Acquittal before trial"
2013 C L D 197
INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT BANK OF PAKISTAN through Vice President/Chief Manager — Appellant Versus ZAHID S. SHEIKH and 4 others — Respondents
Court: Peshawar2020 P Cr
Ch. MUHAMMAD ASLAM and others — Petitioners Versus SESSIONS JUDGE, MUZAFFARGARH and others — Respondents
Court: Lahore (Multan Bench)2004 P Cr
MUHAMMAD ISHAQUE — Appellant Versus SARDAR ALI and another — Respondents
Court: Peshawar2003 P Cr
GHULAM HAIDER alias GAAMI‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent
Court: Lahore2016 P Cr
KAZIM ALI — Appellant Versus LIAQUAT ALI and 7 others — Respondents
Court: Sindh2019 M L D 1092
The STATE through Prosecutor General, Sindh — Appellant Versus MANSOOR MUJAHID — Respondent
Court: Sindh2002 P L C (C
MUMTAZ ALI SHAH Versus CHAIRMAN, PAKISTAN TELECOMMUNICATION COMPANY LTD., H.Q., ISLAMABAD and 6 others
Court: Supreme Court of PakistanP L D 1963 (W
SHER MUHAMMAD‑Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN AND OTHERS-Respondents
Court: S. 439‑Revision against order of acquittal‑(Cross cases)‑Both parties convicted by Magistrate‑Party A acquitted by Sessions Judge, conviction of party B upheld‑Party B preferring two Revision petitions, one against order upholding their conviction, other against acquittal of party A‑First Revision petition admitted by High Court to hearing‑Revision against order of acquittal not to be necessarily admitted to hearing as a matter of course following admission of other Revision petition‑Order of acquittal has certain sanctity attached to it‑Setting aside such order implies re‑trial‑Re‑trial will not be ordered unless previous trial was illegal or mode of trial had resulted in miscarriage of justice‑"Perfectly good" trial will not be set aside by High Court in Revision‑Order of acquittal in such a case therefore does not call for any interference-- Human systems (Criminal Procedure) never perfect‑Possible acquittal in Revision of party B anomalous but such an anomaly has to be necessarily suffered as consequence of treating each case as a separate case‑Barkat Ali v. The State and others (Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 16 of 1963) (unreported) mentioned.2018 M L D 1349
MEHDI HASSAN — Appellant Versus MUHAMMAD SAJID and 2 others — Respondents
Court: Sindh2013 P Cr
Mian MUMTAZ RABBANI — Appellant Versus GHULAM QADIR and 4 others — Respondents
Court: Sindh