Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

Section: 337 , 561

  Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- , ----Ss. 337-A(i)/452/506/i48/149, 506/452 & 354/324---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S.561-A---Quashing of proceedings---In the preliminary proceedings taken in the complaint cases Reader/Clerk of the Magistrate was alleged to have recorded the evidence as well as the order summoning the accused which was only initialled by the Magistrate---Proceedings did not show that the evidence was recorded in the presence or under the dictation of the Magistrate---Magistrate, therefore, could not be presumed to have actively and continuously applied his judicial mind in the proceedings while making a decision for summoning the accused to face criminal trial which had caused a great prejudice to the accused---Preliminary proceedings and the orders of summoning the accused in the cases were consequently declared to be illegal and without lawful authority and the cases were sent back to the Magistrate for recording evidence and thereafter proceeding afresh strictly in accordance with law. 1994 PCrLJ 380; 1994 PCr.LJ 340; 1993 MLD 2045; 1987 PCr.LJ 2499; and 1982 PCr.LJ 949 ref. Abid Saqi for Petitioners. Ch. Muhammad Yaqub Sidhu for Respondent No. 1. Sh. Naseer-ud-Din for the State. Date of hearing: 23rd January, 1995. JUDGMENT This judgment will dispose of (1) Criminal Miscellaneous No.209-Q of 1994 (Tapir J4ved etc. v. Abdul Razzaq etc.), (2) Criminal Miscellaneous No. 243-Q of 1994 (Muhammad Hafeez-etc. v. Muhammad Munir etc.) and (3) Criminal Miscellaneous No.304-Q of 1994 (Muhammad Sher etc. v. State etc.), because a common question of law is involved in the three petitions. The brief facts of each petition are stated hereinbelow: Criminal Miscellaneous No 209-0 of 1994 (Tapir Javed etc. v. Abdul Razzaq etc.) . ., 2. Respondent No. l filed a private-complaint under section 337?AI/452/506/148/149, P.P.C. on 7-7-1994 against petitioners Nos. 1 to 11 in the Court of A.C. Pindi-Bhattian. Learned Magistrate recorded the statements of the complainant and two witnesses. The case was transferred to R. M., Pindi?Bhattian on 1-8-1994. R.M. on 2-8-1994 summoned all the 11 petitioners as accused to face trial. '   This order…