Case Details

Citation(s)
2019 SLG 199 2019 SLD 199 2019 PLD 12
Balochistan High Court
Constitutional Petition No. 961 of 2017, decision Dated: 16-07-2018. hearing Dated: 30-05-2018.
JAMAL KHAN MANDOKHAIL, JUSTICE ZAHEER-UD-DIN KAKAR, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Naseebullah Tareen
Respondent(s) by: Ameer Hamza Mangal, Deputy Prosecutor General

MOMIN KHAN

VS

SPECIAL JUDGE ANTI TERRORISM COURT-II, QUETTA AND ANOTHER

Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Section: 494

Law: Explosive Substances Act, 1908

Section: 4,5

Law: Anti Terrorism Act, 1997

Section: 7

Law: Pakistan Arms Ordinance (XX of 1965)

Section: 13-B,13-D

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----S. 494---Pakistan Arms Ordinance (XX of 1965), Ss. 13-B, 13-D---Explosive Substances Act (VI of 1908), Ss. 4 & 5---Anti Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997), S. 7---Possession of unlicensed arms, attempt to cause explosion, making or keeping explosive with intent to endanger life or property, making or possessing explosives under suspicious circumstances, act of terrorism---Prosecution case was that on spy information police recovered a huge quantity of arms and ammunitions from the house of accused---Application for withdrawal of prosecution was dismissed---Order of dismissal of such application was challenged by accused---Validity---Section 494 Cr.P.C. prescribed that application for withdrawal of prosecution could be made by the Public Prosecutor with the consent of the Trial Court, before the pronouncement of ---Said provision of law suggested that it was within the judicial domain of the Trial Court to refuse or accede to the withdrawal of prosecution of a person in any case---Application for withdrawal of prosecutiion was filed by the Prosecutor, as he alone was competent to do so as provided by S.494 Cr.P.C.---After dismissal of the said application, the Prosecutor or the government did not challenge dismissal order---Accused had no locus standi to challange such order nor could request for withdrawal of the case thus, the constitutional petition was incompetent---Record showed that no reason had been given by the Provincial Government for withdrawal of the case---Trial Court had passed a well-reasoned order based on the comments/proposal of the State functionaries, which did not call for any interference---Constitutional petition was dismissed, in circumstances. The State v. Navid Asif and others PLD 1991 Lah. 268; Mir Hassan v. Tariq Saeed PLD 1997 SC 451; Ch. Muhammad Yaqoob and others v. The State 1992 SCMR 1983; Muhammad Saleem v. Mukhtar Khan and another 1984 PCr.LJ 390; Saad Shibli v. The State and another PLD 1981 SC 617 and Federation of Pakistan through Secretary Ministry of Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs, Islamabad v. Zafar Awan, Advocate High Court PLD 1992 SC 72 rel. THIS JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY:…
🔒
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