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 Appeal No. 551 of 1969, decided on 7th August 1969.
Ss. 480 & 486 and West Pakistan Civil Courts Ordinance (11 of 1962), S. 18 read with Con stitution of Pakistan (1962), Art. 102-Contempt of Court--Appeal against order of conviction passed by civil Court for contempt under S. 228, P. P. C., valuation of original suit being less than Rs. 25,000-- Lies to District Judge and Trot to High Court as required under S. 18, Civil Courts Ordinance, 1962-Specific provisions existing for efficacious rented, by tray of appeal-Provisions of Art. 102, Con stitution of Pakistan (1962), held, cannot be invoked-Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.228.
Raza Kazim for Appellant.
Ghulam Mustafa Bokhari, Asstt. A.-G. for the State.
This Criminal appeal under section 486, Cr. P. C. read with Article 102 of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, arises out of proceedings in the Court of Civil judge, Ist Class, Lahore, resulting in the conviction of the appellant, who is an Advocate, under section 228. P. P. C. and imposition of a sentence of fine of Rs. 40 and in default simple imprisonment for 15 days.
2. The Assistant Advocate-General raising a preliminary objection, has submitted that the criminal appeal is not competent in this Court because, as required by provisions of section 486, Cr. P. C., it should have been filed in the Court of the District Judge to which Court decrees or orders made iii Courts of Civil Judge, 1st Class, are ordinarily appealable. The learned counsel for the appellant has tried to meet this objection by contending that the learned Civil Judge who has recorded the conviction and imposed the fine is invested with the powers of a Civil Judge. Ist Class and appeals against the decree and orders from his Court ordinarily lie in the High Court except when the value of the suit is less than Rs. 25,000. In addition, he has submitted, this appeal invokes the supervisory authority of the High Court under Article 102 of the Constitution and as such could be filed only in this Court.
3. For the purposes of determining whether an appeal from the Court by which the order tinder appeal has been passed is competent in this Court under section 486, Cr. P. C. We have to refer to section 18 of the West Pakistan Civil Courts Ordinance, 1962 which provides "Save as aforesaid, an appeal from a decree or order of a Civil Judge shall lie-(a) to the High Court if the value of the original suit in which the decree or order was made exceeds twenty five thousand rupees; and (b) to the District Judge in any other case." This provision makes it clear that in all cases except those reserved in clause (a) of subsection (1) of section 18 of the Ordinance the appeal lies to the District Judge. Consequently it will be incorrect to contend that ordinarily an appeal from the decree and order of a Civil Judge, Ist Class lies to the High Court and not to the District Judge.
4. A mere reference to Article '102 of the Constitution in a criminal appeal under section 486, Cr. P. C. would not in any manner change the forum of appeal. Article 102 pertains to the general supervisory jurisdiction of the High Court over the subordinate Courts and where an efficacious remedy by way of appeal is specifically provided invoking of provisions of Article 102 would appear to be uncalled for.
5. As the appeal is not competent it shall be returned for presentation to the competent Court after suitable modi fications.
Appeal returned for presentation to competent Court.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer