| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2014 SLG 761 2014 SLD 761 2014 YLR 1736 |
Sindh High Court
Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. S-470 of 2013, decided on 10-02-2014. Date of hearing: 20-01-2014.
SHAHNAWAZ TARIQ, JUSTICE
Ghulamullah Chang for Applicant. Shahid Ahmed Shaikh, Assistant P.G. for
Respondent.
Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. S-470 of 2013, decided on 10-02-2014. Date of hearing: 20-01-2014.
SHAHNAWAZ TARIQ, JUSTICE
Ghulamullah Chang for Applicant. Shahid Ahmed Shaikh, Assistant P.G. for
Respondent.
SHAUKAT ALI MANGRIO
VS
CIVIL JUDGE AND JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE NO.VII, HYDERABAD AND 2 OTHERS
Law:
Section:
Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 175, 217 & 218---Sindh Arms Act (XX of 2013), S.23-A---Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997), S.9(b)---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), Ss.561-A & 190---Omission to produce document to public servant by person legally bound to produce it, disobeying direction of law by public servant, framing incorrect record by public servant, possessing unlicensed arm, possessing and trafficking narcotics---Application for quashing of order---Applicant, (S.H.O.) had sought setting aside of order passed by Judicial Magistrate, whereby he had ordered for issuance of show-cause notice for contempt proceedings against applicant regarding non-submission of list of witnesses---Magistrate under S.190, Cr.P.C. was competent to take cognizance of an offence committed, brought to his knowledge in writing, or orally; and such complaint could be initiated against the respective accused---Present was a glaring case of neglect and failure of compliance of mandatory provisions of law to produce lists of witnesses in the cases as directed by concerned Magistrate---Deviation of applicant for non-compliance of subject order amounted to frustrate the foundation stone of the scheme of administration of criminal justice; which was based upon fair, impartial and transparent investigation of the offence, duly registered by the State functionaries; and it must be carried out strictly in accordance with the relevant provisions of law---Applicant/S.H.O. could not point out any kind of inimical attitude and personal grudge of Magistrate against him---Impugned order passed by the Magistrate against applicant could not be termed as non-speaking, perverse, or capricious order---Magistrate, however, would not conduct further proceedings in that context; and he could file direct complaint on the strength of entire available record, before the court of competent jurisdiction. 2007 PCr.LJ 1515; PLD 2007 Kar. 243; 2001 PCr.LJ.199; 2000 YLR 2857; 2000 PCr.LJ 43; Muhammad Akber v. The State 1972 SCMR 335; Falak Sher v. The State PLD 1967 SC 425; Ch. Muhammad Aslam v. C.P.O. Rawalpindi and others, 2011 PCr.LJ 1870; Zafarullah and another v. The State PLD…
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