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

MUHAMMAD KHAN versus SULTAN


Article (58 ()) and the Supreme Court Rules, 6, 66 OX X, r 1 appeal for special leave against the order of acquittal under the ban with time restriction is not waived until then. Unless it is shown that the applicant was excluded from filing the application on time. Some respondents to the process or some similar compulsion

1969 S C M R 82

Present : Hamoodur Rahman, Muhammad Yaqub Ali and Abdus Sattar, JJ

MUHAMMAD KHAN‑Petitioner

versus

SULTAN AND OTHERS‑Respondents

Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 142 of 1968, decided on 16th October 1968.

(On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of West Pakistan, Lahore, dated the 19th February 1968, in Criminal Appeal No. 393 of 1967).

Constitution of Pakistan (1962)------

---Art. 58 (3) and Supreme Court Rules, 1956, O. XIII, r. 1‑Petition for Special Leave to Appeal against order of acquittal‑Petition barred by time‑Delay cannot be condoned unless it be shown that petitioner was precluded from filing petition in time due to some act of respondent or for some other similar compelling grounds.

S. M. Masood, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by S. Wajid Hussain, Senior Attorney for Petitioner.

Abdul Waheed Khawajx, Advocate Supreme Court for Respondents Nos. 1‑‑6.

Ijaz Ali, Attorney for the State.

Date of hearing : 16th October 1968.

ORDER

MUHAMMAD YAQUB ALI, J.‑

This petition for leave to appeal from the order of a Division Bench of the High Court of West Pakistan in an acquittal matter is barred by four days.

The explanation given for condonation of delay viz., that the petitioner laboured under a wrong impression that the High Court had issued notices to all the accused, but after the expiry of the period of limitation came to know that the revision petition against the respondents had been dismissed, does not constitute sufficient cause within Order XIII, rule 1. On the expiry of the prescribed period of limitation the acquittal of the respondents of charges under sections 148 and 302/ 149, P. P. C. became final and unless it was shown that the petitioner was precluded from filing the petition in time due to some act of the respondents or other similar compelling circumstance the delay will not be condoned. As no such ground is made to appear the petition is dismissed as barred by time.

Leave refused.

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
famous supreme court advocate from Bunner 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.