Case Details

Citation(s)
2011 SLG 2184 2011 SLD 2184 2011 YLR 816
Peshawar High Court
Criminal Miscellaneous Quashment Petition No. 97 of 2009, decided on 14th October, 2010
SHER MUHAMMAD KHAN, J
Iftikhar-ul-Haq for Petitioner. Asghar Ali Khan for
Respondent. Muhammad Farooq Khan for the State

Mir QASIM KHAN

VS

Syed ZAFAR ALI SHAH and 6 others

Law:

Section:

(a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----Ss. 561-A, 200, 195(1)(C), 249-A, 265-K, 439-A, 417(2) & 476---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.467 & 476---Forgery of valuable security, will, etc., counterfeiting device or mark used for authenticating documents other than those described in S.467, or possessing counterfeit marked material---Quashing of proceeding--- Inherent powers of High Court under S.561-A, Cr. P. C. ---Scope---Alleged offence being exclusively triable by the Court of Session, area Magistrate sent complaint file of petitioner to Sessions Judge---After deleting Ss.467 and 476, P.P.C., Additional Sessions Judge sent back the complaint to Judicial Magistrate for trial of remaining offences---Judicial Magistrate dismissed petition for quashment for being pre-mature---Additional Sessions Judge accepted revision filed by respondents and dismissed the complaint of the petitioner holding that the cognizance of the alleged offence could not be taken under S.195(1)(C), Cr.P.C.-Respondent contended that petitioner should have filed appeal under S.417, Cr. P. C. ---Validity---Section 417, Cr. P. C. dealt with appeal against acquittal of accused on merits or other grounds such as exercising the powers under S.249-A or 265-K, Cr.P.C. but the same had nothing to do with maintainability, applicability oft certain sections of law and jurisdictional questions which could only be decided under Ss.435, 439, 439-A or S. 561-A Cr.P.C.-Acquittal meant give by a judge or jury that someone was not guilty---Additional Sessions Judge exercised powers under S.439-A, Cr.P.C. by accepting revision petition of respondents, the same powers could not be invoked by petitioner, before High Court---Section 561-A empowered the High Court to prevent abuse of process of court or otherwise secure ends of justice---Where High Court arrived at conclusion that order passed by a subordinate court amounted to abuse of the process of court, High Court could remedy the injustice by exercising inherent powers---High Court under S.561-A, Cr.P.C. had inherent powers to make such orders as might be necessary to give effect to any order or prevent abuse of process of any court or otherwise…
🔒
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