Find a Lawyer

Every Lawyer listed in this directory is verified by SJP verification Team

✓ Free WhatsApp lawyer help
Need to speak to a lawyer now?

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.

💬 Instant WhatsApp chat ⚖ Verified lawyer directory ⏰ Replies in minutes

versus


Article (58 ()) and the rules of the Supreme Court, X 19566, and X XII, r II by by accepting the special leave application for appeal against a person who has been acquitted for 30 days, to be banned for 30 days. , Gained a valuable right and can only be deprived if it can be shown that he was liable for any delay which led to the dismissal of the petition

1968 S C M R 1345

Present : Fazle‑Akbar, C. J. Muhammad Yaqub Ali and Abdus Sattar, JJ

JALAL KHAN AND ANOTHER‑Petitioners

versus

LAKHMIR AND ANOTHER‑Respondents

Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 284 of 1967, decided on 24th June 1968.

(On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of West Pakistan, Quetta Circuit, Quetta, dated the 30th August 1967, in Criminal Appeal No. 7 of 1967).

Constitution of Pakistan (1962)---

--

Art. 58(3) and Supreme Court Rules, 1956, O. XIII, r. I‑Acquittal‑Petition for Special Leave to Appal against acquittal barred by 30 days Person acquitted acquired a valuable right and he could be deprived of that only if it could be shown that he was in some way responsible for delay Petition dismissed.

S. M. Almas Ali, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Sh. Abdul Karim, Attorney for Petitioners.

Ch. Muhammad Ashraf, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Sh. Ijaz Ali, Attorney for Respondents.

Date of hearing : 24th June 1968.

JUDGMENT

FAZLE‑AKBAR, C. J.

‑This petition is barred by time by 30 days.

In the petition for condonation of the delay, it is stated that the petitioners filed an application before the District Magistrate with a request that the Government should file an appeal against acquittal and as the Magistrate did not take any decision on the said petition there was delay in filing the appeal. This explanation is not considered at all. satisfactory.

By his acquittal, the respondent Lakhmir has acquired a valuable right and he could be deprived of the said right only if he was in some way responsible for the delay in filing this petition. This the petitioners have failed to substantiate.

This petition is, therefore, dismissed as time‑barred.

Petition dismissed.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.

🔍 Find a Lawyer
Popular cities: Lahore· Karachi· Islamabad· Rawalpindi· Multan· Faisalabad
law firms from Bolan lawyer

SJP Lawyers DirectorySJP Lawyers Directory

Pakistan's leading legal-technology platform and verified lawyer directory — connecting clients, lawyers, law firms and Bar Associations across the country.

Get in Touch

© 2018–2027 SJP Legnocrats (SMC-Private) Limited. All rights reserved.
Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes
👋 Need a lawyer? Chat with us free on WhatsApp now.