Lawyers Directory Listing
Chat with us free on WhatsApp — tell us your city and legal matter and our team connects you with the right lawyer. No form, no fee.
Criminal Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 157 of 1968, decided on 25th June 1968.
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of West Pakistan, Lahore, dated the 4th April 1968, in Criminal Original No. 44 of 1968).
---
--- Art. 123‑Accused in a criminal case intimating Magistrate that he intended moving application under S. 526, Cr. P. C. for transfer of case and so case may be adjourned‑Magistrate thereupon getting excited and instead of adjournment deciding case then and there and at same time abusing accused‑High Court in circumstance whether justified in dismissing applications for contempt proceeding under Art. 123 in limine‑Special Leave to Appeal granted by Supreme Court.
Muhammad Ismail, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Sh. Masud Akhtar, Attorney Supreme Court for Petitioner.
Nemo for Respondent.
Date of hearing: 25th June 1968.
The petitioner was challaned by the Munici pal Committee, Hafizabad, under section 115 of the Municipal Administration Ordinance, 1965 and two challans were put up before Mr. S. Ali Zulaarnam, Sub‑Divisional Magistrate, Hafizabad, the respondent. His case is that on the 1st March 1968 when the cases came un for hearing the petitioner filed an application for adjournment of the cases as he wanted to move an application under section 526, Cr. .P. C. in the High Court for the transfer of the cases on the ground that the Sub‑Divisional Magistrate was also the Chairman of the Municipal Committee. After reading the application, the respondent abused the petitioner like anything. One of his remarks was "you have come with beard but in fact you are a rascal". The respondent then instead of adjourning the cases fined the petitioner Rs. 200 then and there.
The petitioner then filed an application under Article 123 of the Constitution in the High Court of West Pakistan at Lahore, for initiatin5 proceeding against the respondent for contempt of Court but this was dismissed in limine by a learned Single Judge. The order passed reads as follows: ‑
"From the statement of facts, narrated in the petition, I do not feel inclined to vindicate the personal grievance of the petitioner. The petition is dismissed.
2. The petitioner has made a prayer that a Certificate should be given under Art. 58 of the Constitution. I do not find the necessity or certifying that an appeal to the Supreme Court would be made. The certificate under section 58 of the Constitution is refused."
It is contended that on the filing of an application for transfer when the respondent abused the petitioner and proceeded with the case he was guilty of contempt of the High Court. The learned Judge in the High Court in view of the assertions made by the petitioner in his petition under Article 123 of the Constitution was not justified in dismissing the said petition in limine.
The contentions raised merit consideration, leave therefore is granted.
Leave granted.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer