Case Details

Citation(s)
2019 SLG 244 2019 SLD 244 2019 YLR 228
Sindh High Court
Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. S-131 of 2018, decision Dated: 27-07-2018.
IRSHAD ALI SHAH, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Rafique Ahmed Abro
Respondent(s) by: Abid Abdul Qadir Abro

ASLAM PERVAIZ AND ANOTHER

VS

TAMEER ALI AND 7 OTHERS

Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Section: 22A(6)(iii),154,173,561A, ScheduleII

Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860

Section: 166

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----Ss. 561-A, 22-A(6)(iii), 154, 173 & Sched.-II---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 166---Public servant disobeying a direction of law with intent to cause injury---Submission of challan of the case to the Court having jurisdiction---Powers and responsibilities of the Police and District Prosecution--- Scope--- Non-cognizable offences---Scope---Respondent in his application under S.22-A(6)(iii), Cr.P.C,sought direction against the applicants (SHO and another Police Official), inter alia, to submit the challan before the Court having jurisdiction----Sessions Court , while disposing of the application of respondent, passed order directing the Senior Superintendent of Police for taking action, by way of lodging of FIR, against the applicants for their failure to submit the challan in prescribed period ---Applicants contended that non-submission of the challan in the Court was not their fault/omission as they had furnished the interim report of the case before District Public Prosecutor within prescribed period---Validity----Proviso (1) to S.173, Cr.P.C., provided that if investigation of the case was not completed within fourteen days from the date of recording of FIR under S.154, Cr.P.C., then within three days of the expiration of such period, the Officer-in-Charge of the Police Station would forward an interim report, stating therein the result of investigation made until then to the Magistrate through Public Prosecutor---Applicants claimed, in the present case, that the interim report was furnished by them before District Public Prosecutor which he failed to forward to the Magistrate having jurisdiction within prescribed time---High Court observed that if it was believed to be so, then omission, if any, in forwarding the interim report before the Magistrate having jurisdiction was on the part of District Public Prosecutor, and for his omission the applicants could not be held responsible; and if, for the sake of arguments, it was believed that applicants had failed to submit interim report before the Magistrate having jurisdiction within prescribed time, even then FIR could not be lodged against them for such omission,…
🔒
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