Case Details

Citation(s)
2019 SLG 2788 2019 SLD 2788 2019 PLD 101
Balochistan High Court
Constitutional Petitions Nos. 176 and 428 of 2019, decision Dated: 23-07-2019. Hearing Dated: 25-06-2019.
MUHAMMAD HASHIM KHAN KAKAR, JUSTICE ABDULLAH BALOCH, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Munir Ahmed Sikandar and Noor Bakhsh Nos. 1 and 2 and Ms. B.K. Marwat No.3 (in C.P. No.176 of 2019). Habibullah Nasar Hayyat Khan (in C.P.No.176 of 2019) for Interveners.
Respondent(s) by: Muhammad Rafiq Langove No.5 Amir Butt, Complai

NAQEEBULLAH AND 2 OTHERS

VS

SSP, INVESTIGATION AND 4 OTHERS

Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860

Section: 34,109,337A(iv),406,417,420,424,504

Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)

Section: O.I,R.10

Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Section: 516-A

Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973

Section: 199

(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- -----Ss. 109, 337-A(iv), 406, 417, 420, 424 & 504---Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 199---Constitutional petition---Reinvestigation---Supplementary statement---First Ingformation Report, quashing of---Accused persons were aggrieved of reinvestigation of case on basis of supplementary statement when challan had already been filed at Trial Court where case was fixed for recording of evidence---Validity---Further investigation so carried out by investigating agency was not maintainable in eyes of law---Offenses mentioned in F.I.R. were not attracted when otherwise F.I.R. was solely lodged with allegations of assaulting complainants and did not contain details of any fraud allegedly committed by accused persons with complainants---Such exercise carried out by investigating officer on basis of supplementary statement was uncalled for---Supplementary statement made by complainant before investigating officer regarding same occurrence was neither admissible as evidence nor same could be equated with F.I.R. or read as its part---Supplementary statement was always considered fragile type of evidence and on basis of same nature of entire case cannot be changed as such kind of supplementary statements are filed after consultation and deliberations---High Court quashed proceedings carried out by investigating officer with regard to reinvestigation and insertions of additional offenses under S.406, 417, 420, 424, 504 & 109 P.P.C.---Petition was allowed accordingly. THIS JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY: ABDULLAH BALOCH, J.--- This common judgment disposes of C.P.No.176 filed by the petitioners (accused) Naqeebullah and Fateh Muhammad C.M.A. No.1207 of 2019 filed by the applicant/intervener Hayat Khan, while C.P.No.428 of 2019 has been filed by the petitioner (complainant) Amir Butt. Since both the petitions along with application under Order I, rule 10 C.P.C., pertains to the same subject matter arising out of FIR No.54 of 2018 of Police Station Zarghoon Abad Quetta, thus the same are being decided through this common judgement. 2. The facts of the C.P. No. 176 of 2019 filed by the petitioners (accused) Naqeebullah son of Haji Naseeb Ullah and…
🔒
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