Law: Prevention of Electronic Crimes Ordinance, 2007

Section: 4,8,9,13,16,19

Law: Prevention of Electronic Crimes Ordinance, 2007

Section: 4,8,9,13,16,19

Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973

Section: 264

Law: Pakistan Telecommunication (Reorganization) Act, 1996

Section: 31(1)

Prevention of Electronic Crimes Ordinance (LXXII of 2007)--- ----Ss. 4, 8, 13, 16 & 19---Pakistan Telecommunication (Re-organization) Act (XVII of 1996), S.31(1)---Electronic Transaction Ordinance (LI of 2002), Ss.36 & 37---Constitution of Pakistan, Art.199---Constitutional petition---Grievance of the petitioners was that despite the `Prevention of Electronic Crimes Ordinance, 2007' having lapsed, they were being proceeded under the said Ordinance---In the present case, complaint under Ss.4, 8, 9, 13 & 16 of Prevention of Electronic Crimes Ordinance, 2007, under S.31(1) of Pakistan Telecommunication (Re-organization) Act, 1996 and Ss.36 & 37 of Electronic Transactions Ordinance, 2002 was lodged against the petitioners---Prevention of Electronic Crimes Ordinance, 2007, which was promulgated in 2007, lapsed on expiry of 120 days---Prevention of Electronic Crimes Ordinance, 2007 being a temporary law and same having been lapsed, proceedings under said Ordinance could not be continued in law---To the extent of the proceedings against the petitioners under the Prevention of Electronic Crimes Ordinance, the same was quashed---Petitioners, however, could be proceeded under other provisions of law as mentioned in the complaint in accordance with law. Muhammad Arif v. The State 1993 SCMR 1589 ref. Rasheed A. Rizvi, Zia-ul-Haq Makhdoom and Mahmood A. Qureshi for Petitioners. Ashiq Raza, D.A.-G. and Adnan Karim, A.A.-G. for Respondents. ORDER Petitioners' grievance is that despite the provision of Prevention of Electronic Crimes Ordinance having lapsed on 4-11-2009, they are being proceeded under the said Ordinance in the Court of VIIth Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate, Karachi South. Learned Counsel for the petitioners has relied upon case of Muhammad Arif v. The State (1993 SCMR 1589) to support his contention that a case initiated on the basis of a temporary law which having lapsed/expired could not be continued as the said case also lapses/expires with the lapsing/expiring of the legislation under which it was initiated. Learned D.A.-G. so also learned A.A.-G. are unable to controvert such legal position. We have considered the submission made by…

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