| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2000 SLG 714 2000 SLD 714 2000 SCMR 122 2000 SLD 1125 2000 SCMR 122 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Petition No.54-P of 1999, decision dated: 11-08-1999.
MUHAMMAD BASHIR, JEHANGIRI AND ABDUR REHMAN KHAN, JJ
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Criminal Petition No.54-P of 1999, decision dated: 11-08-1999.
MUHAMMAD BASHIR, JEHANGIRI AND ABDUR REHMAN KHAN, JJ
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
MIRAJ KHAN-
VS
GUL AHMED and 3 others
Law:
Section:
(a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--Ss. 561-A, 249-A & 265-K---Inherent jurisdiction of High Court ---Quashing of proceedings---High Court in exceptional cases can exercise jurisdiction under S. 561-A, Cr.P.C. without waiting for Trial Court to pass orders sunder-S.249-A, or 265-K, Cr.P.C., if the facts of the case so warrant---Main consideration to be kept in view would be, whether the continuance of the proceedings before the trial forum would be futile exercise, wastage of time and abuse of process of Court or not---If on the basis of facts admitted and patent on record no offence can be made out, then it would amount to abuse of process of law to allow the prosecution to continue with the trial. (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S. 406/419/420---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)---High Court had quashed the F.I.R. lodged by the complainant---Validity---Complainant in the F.I.R. which was based on his written application had admitted that the disputed amount was given to the accused as "Qarze Hasna"---Addition of the word "Amanat" with "Qarze Hasna" was ridiculous and appeared to have been added so as to justify the registration of the criminal case---No offence even on admitted facts could be made out against the accused as the dispute was entirely of civil nature which with ulterior motive had been converted into criminal proceedings---Further proceedings in the Trial Court on the basis of impugned F.I.R. would have been sheer wastage of time---High Court, therefore, had rightly quashed the F.I.R. and the impugned order was not open to any exception---Leave to appeal was refused accordingly. Muhammad Khalid Mukhtar v. The State through Deputy Director, F.I.A. (C.B.A.), Lahore PLD 1997 SC 275; State through Advocate-General, N.-W.F.P., Peshawar and others v. Gulzar Muhammad and others 1998 SCMR 873 and Muhammad Ali and others v. Assistant Commissioner, Narowal and another 1987 SCMR 795 ref. Muhammad Zahoor Qureshi Azad, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner. Kh. M. Khan, Advocate Supreme Court and S. Safdar Hussain, Advocate-on-Record (absent) for Respondent. Date of hearing: 11th August, 1999. ORDER ABDUR REHMAN KHAN, J.---By the impugned…
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