Case Details

Citation(s)
1965 SLG 4759 = 1965 SLD 4759 = 1965 PLD 421
Dacca High Court
Criminal Revision No. 51 of 1964, decided on 9th April 1964.  
Presented By: M. Idris, J  
  Latifur Rahman for Petitioners.   Nemo for the Opposite-Party.

MAIJUDDIN LASKAR AND 13 OTHERS-Petitioners  

VERSUS

  Maulana NURUNNABI-Opposite-Party  

Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Section: 190(1),190(b)

Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

Section: 290,268

(a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898),   S. 190 (1)(b) read with S. 290, Penal Code (XLV of 1860)-Cognizance of offence --Police Officer on receipt of complaint holding investigation without order of competent Magistrate and submitting report for prosecution of accused under S. 290, P. P. C. Magistrate passing order for prosecution on basis of such report-Entire proceedings, held, vitiated.   Hussain Bakhsh v. The State P L D 1963 Lah. 46 rel.   Dr. Kazi Habibul Islam v. The State 10 D L R 152 distinguished.   (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860),   Ss. 268 & 290-Public nuisance-"Common injury, danger or annoyance" not established-Conviction and sentence under S. 290 set aside.     JUDGMENT   This Rule is directed against the order of conviction and sentence under section 290 of the Pakistan Penal Code passed against fourteen accused-petitioners in a summary trial by Mr. P. R. Dutta Choudhry, Magistrate, First Class, Jhenaidah.   According to the prosecution, in the morning of 6-7-1962 accused persons assembled at the house of accused Maijuddin Laskar with their wives, sang objectionable songs with gestures and postures and those acts of the accused caused annoyance to the public.   Defence is a denial about any such occurrence. Their case is that they are Sufis and followers of Sufi Philosophers.   Six witnesses were examined on the side of the prosecution. The learned Magistrate, on a consideration of the evidence, held the accused persons guilty under section 290 of the Pakistan Penal Code and sentenced each of them to pay a fine of Rs. 50 in default to simple imprisonment for one month each.   The accused persons filed a Motion before the Sessions Judge for reference to this Court to set aside this order of conviction and sentence. The learned Sessions Judge rejected the Motion. The accused persons have now approached this Court in the exercise of its criminal revisional jurisdiction for setting aside this order of conviction and sentence under section 290 of the Pakistan Penal Code.   Mr. Latifur Rahman, the learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioners has contended…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register