| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2018 SLG 486 2018 SLD 486 2018 PLD 8 |
Balochistan High Court
Criminal Appeal No. (s) 131 of 2014, decision Date : 13-2-2015, hearing Date : 15-1-2015.
MUHAMMAD EJAZ SWATI, JUSTICE
Zameer Ahmed Safi for Appellants. Abdul Latif Khan Kakar, Additional Advocate-General for the State.
Criminal Appeal No. (s) 131 of 2014, decision Date : 13-2-2015, hearing Date : 15-1-2015.
MUHAMMAD EJAZ SWATI, JUSTICE
Zameer Ahmed Safi for Appellants. Abdul Latif Khan Kakar, Additional Advocate-General for the State.
RAHIM BAKHSH AND ANOTHER
VS
THE STATE
Law:
Section:
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----Ss. 87, 88 & 89---Attached property, restoration of---Principle---Appellants after facing trial were acquitted from the charge---Properties of appellants were attached at the time of issuance of process by Trial Court---Appellants (accused) sought restoration of said property after two years of the order of attachmwnt---Trial Court declined to restore properties to appellants---Validity---Provision of S.87, Cr.P.C., prescribed mode of giving notice to accused to appear before Court not less than thirty days and if no such notice was given, proclamation could not be presumed to be valid proclamation and presumption under S.87(3), Cr.P.C. would not arise---No proper and legal proclamation specifying period of thirty days for appellants to appear and no statement in writing by Trial Court to the effect that proclamation was duly published on specified day, as provided under S.87(3), Cr.P.C. existed in the present case---All proceedings which had been initiated by Trial Court were without any jurisdiction and contrary to the provisions of Ss. 87 & 88, Cr.P.C.---Trial Court without adhering to the provisions of law had passed the order in question which was not sustainable---High Court set aside attachment order and restored properties to the appellants---Appeal was allowed in circumstances. THIS JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY: MUHAMMAD EJAZ SWATI, JUSTICE:---.--- The only point that requires consideration in this case is whether the appellants are entitled to the restoration of their properties, which were attached under Section 88 of the Cr.P.C.? The appellants were wanted in case FIR No. 06 of 2009, under Sections 302, 147, 149, P.P.C. and proceedings under Section 87 of the Cr.P.C. was issued on 12th May 2009, by the Additional Sessions Judge, Dera Allah Yar (hereinafter referred as to "the trial Court") as under: 2. On 12th June 2009, the trial Court ordered for attachment of the immovable properties of the appellants, which are still attached. It appears that the appellants were acquitted by the trial Court, vide order dated 30th April 2012 and after getting acquittal, the appellants on 3rd September 2014, filed an…
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