TAHIR MAHMOOD versus THE STATE THROUGH ADVOCATE-GENERAL
Section 173 Criminal Procedure (XLV of 1860), Sections 353, 186, 337A, 337F and 506 of the Azad Jammu and Kashmir Interim Authorization Act (VIII of 1974), Section 42 strikes to prevent civil servants from discharging government employment. Or criminal force; Shuja and Ghith Jaffa and police report on criminal threats The scope case was filed against the appellant / accused and the police when necessary to cancel the report under section 173, CR PC. The Tehsil Criminal Court sought the dissenting opinion of the police. Determining the date of the hearing to the accused and the appellant / accused, it is stated that the order of the criminal court which was dismissed by the legitimate police under section 173, CRPC, by filing a review petition. The competent jurisdiction had to be presented to the police court. The jurisdiction to declare a person innocent or not guilty was not only with the court to convict or convict a person. Before passing the order on the police report, the magistrate was not authorized to commit the crime. Examine the record and make an opinion, whether the police report was correct or not. And whether the police's request for the case to be dismissed was genuine or not, if the magistrate came to the conclusion after understanding the record that the police came to the correct conclusion after investigating that the case was false, he had to cancel the case, however, the magistrate. It turns out that the accused is linked to the crime. And there was enough material for the trial, then they would ask the accused for the trial. The courts were not bound by the opinion of the police, but the content was made up of a criminal court.
Related judgments — Supreme Court Azad Kashmir, 2012
