| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1981 SLG 3292 = 1981 SLD 3292 = 1981 PCRLJ 1262 |
Lahore High Court
Criminal Revision No. 1046 of 1969, decided on 28th, September, ltm0,
Presented By: Muhammad Rafiq Tarar, J
Nemat Khan for Petitioner. Shaman Mahmood for the State.
Criminal Revision No. 1046 of 1969, decided on 28th, September, ltm0,
Presented By: Muhammad Rafiq Tarar, J
Nemat Khan for Petitioner. Shaman Mahmood for the State.
SHABBIR AHMAD KHAN Petitioner
VERSUS
THE STATE---------Respondent
Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
Section: 197
Law: Pakistan Criminal Law Amendment Act (XL of 1958)
Section: 6(5)
Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)
Section: 409
(a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) S. 197, Pakistan Criminal Law Amendment Act (XL of 1958). S, 6 (5) read with Penal Code (XLV of 1880), S. 409--Sanction for prosecution declined by delegates (Municipal Corporation) and pets. (loner punished departmentally-Anti-Corruption agency obtaining fresh sanction from delegator/governor for prosecution.-Held; Power once competently exercised by delegatee gets exhausted and no longer left in delegator to be exercised in a different manner,. (Sanction for prosecution). Naseem Fatima case P L D 1967 Lah. 103 ref. West Pakistan Land Commission v. Fateh Ullah Khan P L D 1971 S C 393 rel. (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860) S. 409-Case against petitioner registered 16 years back and heard 11 years after its institution-Amount involving only Rs. 205 for which petitioner already punished departmentally-Held: Not just and proper to put petitioner to jeopardy of trial after such a long time. Date of hearing; 28th September, 1980. JUDGMENT The facts giving rise to this petition are as follows: - Shabbir Ahmad Khan petitioner was sent up for trial under sec tion 409. P. P. C. before Special Judge, Anti-Corruption, Lahore. He is an employee of the Lahore Municipal Corporation which is his appointing and dismissing authority. The Anti-Corruption authorities moved the Corporation twice for obtaining sanction for his prosecution, but it was declined on the ground that having been punished departmentally, he could not be punished again for the same offence. The Anti-Corruption -Authorities then moved the Governor for the grant of sanction which was accorded vide Letter No. SOI(LG)LMC-1-10/63, dated 26th September, 1967. 2. The petitioner moved an application before the Special Judge. Anti-Corruption, raising an objection that…