| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2007 SLG 3103 2007 SLD 3103 2007 PLJ 771 |
Lahore High Court
I.C.A. No. 41 of 2007 in W.P. No. 480 of 2007, decided on 27.2.2007.
MUHAMMAD SAYEED AKHTAR AND MUHAMMAD, JEHANGIR ARSHAD, JJ.
Malik Javed Akhtar Vains, Advocate for Appellant
I.C.A. No. 41 of 2007 in W.P. No. 480 of 2007, decided on 27.2.2007.
MUHAMMAD SAYEED AKHTAR AND MUHAMMAD, JEHANGIR ARSHAD, JJ.
Malik Javed Akhtar Vains, Advocate for Appellant
AHMAD YAR
VS
S.H.O. SHAH KOT DISTT. SAHIWAL and 8 others--Respondents
Law:
Section:
(i) Second F.I.R.-- ----Registration of second F.I.R--Different version--Second FIR should not contain the facts for mere amplification of first version. [P. 773] A (ii) Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 (V of 1898)-- ----S. 63--Law Reforms Ordinance, 1972--S. 3(i)--Report for cancellation of FIR--Power of Magistrate--Discharged from Magistrate u/S. 63 Cr.P.C.--Report for cancellation of the case before Magistrate who may refuse to take cognizance of the matter on the basis of such report--Intra Court Appeal was dismissed. [P. 773] B Order Muhammad Jehangir Arshad, J.--This I.C.A. proceeds against the judgment dated 15.2.2007 whereby the learned single Judge in chamber while accepting Writ Petition No. 480 of 2007 filed by Mst. Saban-respondent seeking registration of second FIR, directed the S.H.O. Police Station Shahkot to perform his legal obligation and register the second FIR on the statement of Mst. Saban writ petitioner and proceed strictly in accordance with law. 2. It is argued by learned counsel for the appellant:-- (i) That although registration of second FIR was not barred by law yet the fact remains that the story being set up by Respondent No. 2 is not consistent with the one already incorporated in the earlier FIR No. 376/2006 dated 14.11.2006; (ii) That Respondent No. 2 despite claiming herself to be the eye-witness of the occurrence dated 14.11.2006 kept mum till 24.11.2006 filed a petition before the learned Justice of Peace under Section 22-A Cr.P.C. on 28.11.2006 i.e. after lapse of fourteen days but this fact has been ignored by the learned single Judge in chamber while passing the impugned order; (iii) That the learned Justice of Peace in exercise of his jurisdiction under Section 22-A Cr.P.C. did not direct registration of case but only directed the S.H.O. to record statement of the petitioner and proceed strictly in accordance with law, whereas, the learned single Judge in chamber wrongly construed the same as a direction for registration of case which type of direction could not be issued in constitutional jurisdiction; and (iv) That Mst. Jannat Bibi (deceased) for whose murder the order for registration of case has been passed by learned…
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