Case Details

Citation(s)
1984 SLG 523 1984 SLD 523 1984 SCMR 455
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal petition No. K-3 of 1982, decision dated: 24-04-1982 (From the order, dated 6-12-1981 of the High Court of Sind passed fu Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 862 of 1981)
S. A. NUSRAT AND M. S. H. QURAISHI, JJ

Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395

DEEN MUHAMMAD AND others

VS

. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER AND S. D. M., SHAHDADPUR AND OTHERS

Law:

Section:

Constitution of Pakistan (1973)--- Art. 185 (3)-Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 561-A read with Ss. 148(3), 491(2) & 544 and High Court (Lahore) Rules and Orders, Vol. V, Chap. 4-F, r. 17-Costs-Award of costs - Not alien to criminal jurisprudence--Situation where costs awarded-High Court can also impose costs under S. 491 (2), Cr. P. C.-Application under S. 561-A, Cr. P. C. found to be based upon misrepresentation, a stay order obtained and concerned persons summoned-Held, High Court was justified in taking view that petitioners were guilty of abuse of process of Court--Leave to appeal refused. Faizan-ul Haq, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners. M.I. Memon, Addl. A. G. (Sind) for Respondents. Date of hearing: 24th April, 1982. ORDER M. S. H. QURAISHI, J.-The petitioners are aggrieved by the imposition of costs by the Sind High Court while dismissing their Criminal Miscellaneous Applications Nos. 862 of 1981 and 1316 of 1981. 2. The first-mentioned application had been filed under section 561-A, Cr. P. C. in respect of a proceeding, which, according to the petitioners, was pending before the Assistant Commissioner, Shahdadpur, under section 145, Cr. P. C. A stay of the proceeding had also been obtained on the basis of that assertion. However, after the Mukhtiarkar concerned was examined and the order of the Assistant Commissioner, dated 18-10-1981 which had resulted in the attachment of copy was produced, it turned out that there was in fact no proceeding under section 145 or under any other provision of the Code of Criminal Procedure, but that the matter was being dealt with on the revenue side. It was for this reason that the learned Judge of the High Court held: "I see no force in this contention of the learned Advocate for the applicants, to say the least the applicants have suppressed the true facts from this Court in the above application and have obtained the orders for admission of the above application on a representation that proceedings under section 145, Cr. P. C. were pending against them, in which the lands in question have been…
πŸ”’
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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