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

ABDULLAH SHAIKH versus HAJI AMIN SHAIKH


Criminal Code of Conduct (CCPC) under Section 1A1A, Special Procurement of such Powers by a Kashmiri and Sessions Court of Powers of Operation Under CRPC under Section 1 561A, CCP Color exercises, which are illegal and without jurisdiction, are exercised with the modification jurisdiction. Order placed aside based on circumstances [Revised (offender) hereditary options]

1979 P Cr. L J 753

[Karachi]

Before Mushtak Ali Kazi, J,

ABDULLAH SHAIKH ---Petitioner

versus

Haji AMIN SHAIKH

AND 3 OTHERS---Respondents

Criminal Revision Application No. 18 of 1977, decided on 12th September, 1978.

Crimiual Procedure Code (V of 1898)---

---S. 561-A-Quashment of proceedings-Powers under S. 561. A, Cr. P. C. inherent with High Court and its exclusive prerogative-Colourful exercise of such powers by a Sessions Court in exercise of revisional jurisdiction, held, illegal and without jurisdiction-Order set aside, in circumstances.-[Revision (criminal)-Inherent powers].

Naraindas C. Motiani for Petitioner.

Nooruddin N. Ramzan for Respondents Nos. 1 to 3.

Tariq Ali for the State.

Date of hearing : 12th September, 1978.

JUDGMENT

MUSHTAK ALI KAZI, J.--

-This is a revision application under section 439 read with section 561-A, Cr. P. C. against an order by 7th Additional Sessions Judge, Karachi directing quashment of the proceedings of a criminal case. Ordinarily the powers of the Sessions Court and the High Court in exercise of revisional jurisdiction are concurrent and if the powers are exercised by the Sessions Judge then the High Court is not supposed to entertain a second revision application ; but in the present case it would appear that the learned Additional Sessions Judge quashed the proceedings of a pending criminal case as in his opinion the complaint had been brought for the purpose of harassment and the proceedings) amounted to abuse of the process of Court. It has rightly been pointed out by the learned counsel on behalf of the petitioners that the powers to prevent abuse of the process of Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice are the inherent powers of the .High Court and these powers dot not vest in the Additional Sessions Judge in the exercise of his revisional jurisdiction. The very words used by the learned Additional Sessions Judge show that he has assumed the inherent powers of the High Court under section 561-A and quashed the proceedings to prevent abuse of the process of Court. These orders being illegal and without jurisdiction would be deemed to be a nullity in the eye of law. Under these circumstances the proceedings directed to be quashed are restored and the order of Additional Sessions Judge is accordingly set aside. It would, however, be open to the respondent to move the High Court for quashment of the proceedings if in his opinion there are sufficient grounds for doing so.

Proceedings restored.

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
best law firms from Multan 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.