| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2026 SLG 3664 = 2026 SLD 3664=2026 PHC 4118 |
Peshawar High Court
Criminal Appeal No.345â€P/2026
Presented By: IJAZ ANWAR, JUDGE
For Petitioner(s): Appellants with Mr. Mohammad Yousaf Orakzai, Advocates. For respondents (s) Mr. Taskeen Uddin Khattak, AAG. Research Assistant by: Riaz Aslam Daavi, SRO PHCP. Date of hearing: 18.06.2026
Criminal Appeal No.345â€P/2026
Presented By: IJAZ ANWAR, JUDGE
For Petitioner(s): Appellants with Mr. Mohammad Yousaf Orakzai, Advocates. For respondents (s) Mr. Taskeen Uddin Khattak, AAG. Research Assistant by: Riaz Aslam Daavi, SRO PHCP. Date of hearing: 18.06.2026
Qamar Zaman S.I and others (Appellants)
VS
The State (Respondent).
Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860
Section: 174,186,172–187
Law: Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898
Section: 5, 6,28,190 ,193,195(1)(a),172–187, 200–204,476,174, 487
Facts
The appellants, who were serving police officials, were convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge under Section 174 of the Pakistan Penal Code (PPC) for failing to appear before the trial court as prosecution witnesses despite court notices. They were sentenced to one month simple imprisonment and a fine of Rs.1,000 each.
The appellants challenged the conviction, arguing that:
- Their absence was not deliberate or intentional.
- They were not given an opportunity to explain their absence.
- The trial court lacked jurisdiction to directly try an offence under Section 174 PPC because of the bar contained in Section 195 Cr.P.C.
Core Legal Issues
- Whether the Trial Court had jurisdiction to directly try and convict the appellants under Section 174 PPC.
- What is the proper legal procedure for prosecuting an offence under Section 174 PPC.
Findings of the High Court
The High Court held that: