Case Details

Citation(s)
2014 SLG 634 2014 SLD 634 2014 MLD 1413
Lahore High Court
Criminal Appeal No. 180 of 2010, decided on 18-12-2013. Date of hearing: 18-01-2013.
SADAQAT ALI KHAN, JUSTICE
Mian Muhammad Tayyab Wattu for Appellant. Muhammad Saleem Faiz for
Respondent. Mr. Khalid Pervaiz Uppal, learned D.P.G. for the State.

MUHAMMAD ISMAIL

VS

THE STATE AND OTHERS

Law:

Section:

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----Ss. 417(2-A), 403 & 248---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.337-A(iv) & 34---Causing Shajjah-i-Munaqqilah, common intention---Appeal against acquittal---Double jeopardy---Complainant, initially got registered F.I.R. against respondents/accused persons for causing injuries to him and his brother---Complainant being dissatisfied with the investigation of the Investigating Officer filed private complaint against accused persons in the court of Magistrate---Challan had been submitted in the F.I.R. case---State case and the private complaint, both were consolidated by the Trial Court and charge was framed---After framing of the charge, evidence was recorded, whereafter complainant made a statement for withdrawal of private complaint---Trial Court, granted permission to withdraw case and acquitted accused persons---No person would be liable to be tried again for the same offence, nor on the same facts after acquittal while such acquittal remained in force; as S.403, Cr.P.C. contemplated a situation where a person had once tried by a court of competent jurisdiction and acquitted he could not be tried again for the same offence, nor for any other offence based on similar facts---Criminal charge once having been adjudicated upon by a competent court and that adjudication was final, whether it ended in acquittal or conviction---Complainant having withdrawn his private complaint after recording of the prosecution evidence and accused were acquitted in view of S.248, Cr.P.C., they could not be tried in State case in view of S.403, Cr.P.C. being double jeopardy---Accused could not be tried a second time for the same offence in presence of the acquittal, as acquittal would bar the trial of the acquitted accused in accordance to the provision of subsection (1) of S.403, Cr.P.C.---Impugned order of the Trial Court was quite legal warranting no interference. 2005 MLD 1859; PLD 1987 Lah. 245; 1993 PCr.LJ 576 and 2011 PCr.LJ 936 ref. THIS JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY: SADAQAT ALI KHAN, J.--- This judgment shall dispose Criminal Appeal No.180 of 2010 filed by Muhammad Ismail present appellant against the order dated 5-4-2010 passed by learned…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492