Find a Lawyer

Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. K-62 of 1967, decided on 29th January 19hR (On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of West Pakistan, Karachi Bench, Karachi, dated the 13th October 1967, in Criminal Revision Application No. 75 of 1967).

S. 203-Magistrate discharging accused on failure of complainant to produce written or oral evidence in support of these allegations- -No ground for interfer ence with order of discharge--Special Leave to Appeal refused by Supreme Court.

Petitioner in person

Nemo for Respondents

Date of bearing: 29th January 1'168.

.---This petitioner filed a complaint against the five respondents under sections 120-B, 107, 121-A, 307, 167, 182, 469, 499 and 500 of the Pakistan Penal Code, in the Court of the Additional District Magistrate, Karachi, and he forwarded the said complaint to Mr. Jamaluddin Jumani, A. C. M., Karachi. The complainant, however, did not adduce any evidence and before the Magistrate could pass any order in the case, he was transferred. Mr. Niek Muhammad Bhutto, his successor, then passed the following order on 7-12-66:

The applicant is unable to substantiate the charges made by him against the opponents. He is not in a position to produce written or oral evidence in support of his contention. The allegations appear to be vague. I therefore dismiss the complaint under section 203, Cr. P. C."

The complainant then moved a revision petition in the High Court against the above order and he was directed to file a revision before the Sessions Judge. On 21-2-67, he filed a revision petition before the Sessions Judge, Karachi. On the date fixed for bearing, of the revision the petitioner was found absent on call and the Additional Sessions Judge while dismissing the revision petition pointed out that the application was time-barred and that the Magistrate was justified in dismissing the complaint because the petitioner had failed to lead any evidence before the Magistrate. Against the said order he filed a revision in the High Court on 9-5-67. Notice of the petition could not be served on two out of the five respondents namely, Siffat Hussain and Asif Majeed, because the address of the former was not known and the other was in England. During pendency of the revision i.e., on 26-9-67, the petitioner filed a petition for impounding the passport of the respondent Muhammad Aslam on the ground that he was about to leave Pakistan. On 2-10-67, a learned Single Judge passed the following order:-

"Instead of disposing of the application, I think, the best course is to dispose of the main Criminal Revision Application. By consent to be fixed in next week, on a date suitable to the parties."

On 11-10-67, the petitioner filed a petition for adjourning hearing of the criminal revision till service of summons upon respondents Siffat Hussain and Asif Majeed. As the respondent Aslam was to go outside Pakistan on duty, the Court did not accede to the prayer of the applicant and heard the revision petition on 13th October 1967. The learned Single Judge declined to interfere with the order of the S. D. M. as the complainant bad failed to adduce any evidence before him. He accordingly dismissed the petition. The petitioner now seeks special leave to appeal against the order of the High Court.

The petitioner who has appeared in person has contended that the respondents are high Government officials and unless they are suspended from service no one would come forward to give evidence against them. In the petition he has stated that he has a number of documents in his possession which will support the allegations made by him against the respondents. There is, however, nothing to show that he even attempted to tender them in evidence before the Magistrate. In these circumstances, we see no good ground for interference with the order of the High Court,

This petition is dismissed.

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.