| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1965 SLG 79 1965 SLD 79 1965 PLD 179 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Appeal No. 116 of 1963, decision dated: 21st December 1964. dates of hearing: 27th and 28th April 1964
A. R. CORNELIUS, C.J., S. A. RAHMAN, FAZLEAKBAR, B. Z. KAIKAUS AND HAMOODUR RAHMAN, JJ
Mahmud Ali Senior Advocate Supreme Court instructed by M. Siddiq Senior Attorney for Appellants. M. A. Zullah Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Ijaz Ali Attorney for the State. Tufail Ali A. Rahman Senior Advocate (Mushir Ahmad P. Imam Advocate with hi
Criminal Appeal No. 116 of 1963, decision dated: 21st December 1964. dates of hearing: 27th and 28th April 1964
A. R. CORNELIUS, C.J., S. A. RAHMAN, FAZLEAKBAR, B. Z. KAIKAUS AND HAMOODUR RAHMAN, JJ
Mahmud Ali Senior Advocate Supreme Court instructed by M. Siddiq Senior Attorney for Appellants. M. A. Zullah Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Ijaz Ali Attorney for the State. Tufail Ali A. Rahman Senior Advocate (Mushir Ahmad P. Imam Advocate with hi
Syed RIAZ HAIDER ZAIDI AND 7 others
VS
(1) THE STATE AND (2) LEVER BROTHERS (PAKISTAN) LTD., RAHIMYARKHAN
Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860
Section: 149,323,427,302
Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
Section: 417,526,439(4),423,439,423(1)(b)
(a) Constitution of Pakistan (1962), Art. 58-Leave to appeal to Supreme Court-Granted to consider whether an order of transfer could, under S. 526, Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), be made in his administrative capacity by Acting Chief Justice of High Court thereby withdrawing a criminal appeal from Court of Session to High Court; whether by adopting such procedure, express bar of S. 439(4), Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) could be got over, particularly since appellants were thereby deprived of a right of revision to High Court from appellate order of Court of Session; whether High Court was competent to make the order dismissing appeal under S. 423, Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), in absence of any appeal under S. 417, Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898). (b) Constitution of Pakistan (1962), Art. 58-Leave to appeal to Supreme Court-Supreme Court, while granting leave, gave permission "to re-examine evidence to see if chances of false implication have been adequately excluded". (c) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), Ss. 439 & 526 read with S. 417-Revision by private party against appellate order of acquittal in case of "trivial" nature under Ss. 323 & 426, Penal Code (XLV of 1860), but involving labour dispute between employers and accused employees-Acquittal by appellate Court "plainly without foundation in law"-High Court (Division Bench) setting aside acquittal and remanding appeal for re-hearing, but "Immediately" by a "further" order, Acting Chief Justice (a member of Division Bench) transferring appeal, under S. 526, Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), from appellate (Sessions) Court to High Court and directing disposal of appeal by other member of Bench who, however, happened also to have been a member of another Division Bench which had disposed of a "connected case"-Appeal eventually dismissed-Propriety of such procedure (resulting in eventual alteration of an order of acquittal into one of conviction in a case which in normal course would have come to High Court in Revision), questioned before Supreme Court-Supreme Court declaring case not to be free from complexity, maintained High Court's order of dismissal but reduced…
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