| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1982 SLG 853 1982 SLD 853 1982 PLD 601 |
Lahore High Court
Intra-Court Appeal No. 90 of 1982, decided on 10th April, 1982
GUL MUHAMMAD KHAN AND MUHAMMAD AFZAL LONE, JJ
S. M. K. Lodhi for Appellant
Intra-Court Appeal No. 90 of 1982, decided on 10th April, 1982
GUL MUHAMMAD KHAN AND MUHAMMAD AFZAL LONE, JJ
S. M. K. Lodhi for Appellant
Mst. ZAHIDA KHATOON--Appellant
VS
S. H. O., POLICE STATION, MOZANG LAHORE AND another--Respondents
Law:
Section:
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)- -- S. 195(1)(c) read with S. 4(1)(h)-Complaint-Definition-Cognizance of offence of forgery under S. 463, P. P. C.-Prerequisite, according to S. 195(i)(c)-Exception created by S. 195 to general rule entitling every person to set law in motion by lodging a complaint Held, cannot permit achieving same result indirectly by getting a case registered-Alleged offence under S. 463, P. P. C. neither committed in lawful proceedings nor by a party to such proceedings-Held, does not fall under S. 195(1)(c) and complaint could legally be received by Police Officer for registering a case-[Bar Association v. Crown P L D 1853 B J 33 ; Crown v. Wazir Muhammad P L D 1953 Pesh. 21 ; Ch. Mohammad Roshan v. State P L D 1978 Lab. 307 and State v. S. Ali Hussain P L D 1975 Kar. 403 not applicable].- [Complaint]. Bar Association v. Crown P L D 1953 B J 33 ; Crown v. Wazir Muhammad P L D 1953. Pesh. 21 ; Ch. Mohammad Roshan v. State P L D 1978 Lab. 307 and State v. S. Ali Hussain P L D 1975 Kar. 403 not applicable. Emperor v. Bal Mukand A I R 1928 Lab. 510 ; H. N. Rishbud v. State of Delhi A I R 1;955 S C 196 ; Babu Ram v. Emperor 11 I C 141 ; Sumat Prashad v. Emperor A I R 1942 All. 11 ; Emperor v. Ram Piasad I L R 35 All. 58 ; Mst. Zainab Khatoon v. Ghulam Shabbir P L D 1965 S C 55 ; Ghazi Abdul Yawar v. C. S. C. P L J 1973 Lab. 232 ; Subbarayuder v. Gopayya A I R 1932 Mad. 290 ; Emperor v. Rasul Ahmad A I R 1947 All. 173 ; In re: Royalla Ramappa A I R 1944 Mad. 528; Lala Mathur Prasad v. Pitambar Singh A I R 1945 Pat. 362 ; Emperor v. Ghansham Singh 32 I L R 74; John Martin Segueira v. Luja Bal 25 I L R 671 and Kartick Chandra 3kwas v. Emperor A I R 1930 Cal. 278 ref. ORDER GUL MUHAMMAD KHAN, J.-This Infra-Court Appeal is directed against the order dated 24th March, 1982, passed by a learned Single Judge of this Court holding that the write petition became infructuous as the Martial Law authority had taken cognizance of the case for trial by a Military Court. 2. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the appellant was transferred a residential plot bearing Khasra No. 830-1 measuring 8 kanals situate in Davisabad, Lahore, under the Displaced…
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