| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2017 SLG 2681 2017 SLD 2681 2017 PCRLJ 1067 |
Sindh High Court
Crl. Misc. Applications Nos. 589/2010, 587/2013, Crl. Revision No. 7/2013, Crl. Misc. App. No. 783/2013, C.P. No. D-1338/2013, Crl. Misc. App. Nos. 137, 174, 631, 817, 826 of 2013, 269 of 2014 and Crl. Rev. No. 63 of 2014, decision Dated: 02-06-2016.
AQEEL AHMED ABBASI, JUSTICE MUHAMMAD FAISAL KAMAL ALAM, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Qurban Ali Malano, Zufliqar Ali Sangi, Shabbir Ali Bozdar, Bakhshan Khan Mahar, Achar Khan Gabole
Respondent(s) by: Zulfiqar Ali Jatoi, DPG, Abdul Rehman Kolachi, APG, Shafique Ahmed Leghari, State Counsel along with Tarique Ali DD, ACE
Crl. Misc. Applications Nos. 589/2010, 587/2013, Crl. Revision No. 7/2013, Crl. Misc. App. No. 783/2013, C.P. No. D-1338/2013, Crl. Misc. App. Nos. 137, 174, 631, 817, 826 of 2013, 269 of 2014 and Crl. Rev. No. 63 of 2014, decision Dated: 02-06-2016.
AQEEL AHMED ABBASI, JUSTICE MUHAMMAD FAISAL KAMAL ALAM, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Qurban Ali Malano, Zufliqar Ali Sangi, Shabbir Ali Bozdar, Bakhshan Khan Mahar, Achar Khan Gabole
Respondent(s) by: Zulfiqar Ali Jatoi, DPG, Abdul Rehman Kolachi, APG, Shafique Ahmed Leghari, State Counsel along with Tarique Ali DD, ACE
ABDUL HAFEEZ AND OTHERS
VS
DISTRICT CO-ORDINATION OFFICER, CHOTKI AT MIRPUR MATHELO AND OTHERS
Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
Section: 200,561A
(a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----Ss. 200 & 561-A---Prevention of Corruption Act (II of 1947), Preamble---Sindh Enquiries and Anti-Corruption Rules, 1993, R. 11---Private/direct complaint---Material on record was not examined---Order passed by the Trial Court on the direct complaint received from private person, issuing direction to the Anti-Corruption Department to register FIR under Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 were administrative in nature for having been passed without hearing the concerned parties---Such orders had been passed in violation of provisions of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947---Constitutional petition was allowed and proceedings initiated by Trial Court were quashed by High Court. (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----Ss. 200 & 561-A---Private/direct complaint---Procedure---Trial Court, in complaint cases, was required to examine the material through preliminary inquiry---Trial Court, in the present case, neither recorded statement of the complainant nor conducted preliminary inquiry---Cognizance was taken of the complaint in terms of S. 204, Cr.P.C.---Direction was issued for the registration of FIR---Trial Court, in circumstances, did not observe the legal procedure and passed order for the registration of FIR in violation of law---Constitutional petition was allowed and proceedings carried out by the Trial Court were quashed accordingly. Syed Murad Ali Shah v. Government of Sindh and others PLD 2002 Kar. 464 rel. THIS THIS ORDER PASSED BY: PASSED BY: AQEEL AHMED ABBASI, JUSTICE:--- .--- A common controversy has been agitated in the aforesaid matters challenging the identical orders passed by learned Anti- Corruption Court Sukkur on Direct Complaints, whereby, directions have been issued to the Anti-Corruption Department for registration of FIR on the basis of such complaints. According to learned counsel for the petitioners/applicants the impugned order(s) passed by the learned Judge of Anti-Corruption Court, Sukkur, in the instant matters are without lawful authority and violative of express provision of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947, provisions of section 200, Cr.P.C., as well as in violation of…
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