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.
Constitutional Petitions Nos. D‑994, D‑1065 and D‑1066 of 1978, decided on 22nd October 1978.
(a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑
‑‑ S. 173‑Report with regard to commission of a cognizable offence lodged in Police Station‑Does not ipso facto ripen into a case‑Such report has to be investigated and may or may not result in submission of final challan in Court under S. 173.‑[First Information Report Cognizable offence].
(b) Sind Prohibition Ordinance (IV of 1978)‑
‑. ‑ Ss. 3 & 4‑Mere possession of liquor‑‑Held, not an offence accord ing to Ordinance. ‑[Possession].
FAKHRUDDIN G. EBRAIRM, J.‑The facts .giving rise to this petition are ' that the workman employed in the respondent hotel formed a registered Trade Union in January 1970 following, which they gave; a notice under
(c) Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑
‑‑ Art. 199‑Jurisdiction of High Court under Art. 199‑Court not . called upon to go into investigation of facts.‑[Jurisdiction]. [p. 470]C
Begun Nasrat Bhutto v. Chief of Army Staff any another P L D 1977 S C 657 and Z. A. Bhutto v. The State P L D 1978 S C 40 ref.
(d) Martial Law Order, 1977 [M. L. A. Zone 'C']‑
No. 4 [as reconstituted by Martial Law Order No. 37 of 1978], read with Pakistan Army Act Rules, 1954 ‑Martial Law Courts -Courts of expediency and exigency‑Such Courts, however, required to act within limits laid down in M. L. O. No. 4 as to jurisdiction and Pakistan Army Act Rules as to procedure‑Action of such Courts, so long as limits not transgressed, not open to correction.‑[Jurisdiction Practice and procedure].
The Martial Law Courts are Courts of expediency and exigency and sophistications of trial and procedure are not to be looked into in the cases decided by such Courts. They are, however, required to act within the limits laid down in the Martial Law Order No. 4, as to their jurisdiction, and the Pakistan Army Act Rules, as to the procedure to be followed by them, and so long such limits are not transgressed their actions are not open to correction.
Rustam Ali v. Martial Law Administrator P L D 1978 Kar. 736 ; Nazir Ahmed v. Lt: Col. Abbas Ali Khan P L D 1978 Kar. 777 and Khudiadad v. Martial Law Administrator P L D 1978 Quetta 177 ref.
Rashid Akhutrd for Petitioner.
Usman Ghani for A. G. with Abbas H. Farooqul for Respondents.
Date of hearing : 15th October 1978.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer