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 Miscellaneous No. 610/Q 'of 1977/BWP, decided on 24th November, 1979.
‑‑--S..155 and Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 186 read with Notifica tion No. Judl‑1‑3 (1)/69 dated 14th March, 1969‑Cognizable offence ‑ Contention that offence under S. 186 being non -cognizable and investigation without permission of competent Magistrate vitiates trial, held, incorrect‑Offence under section notified as cognizable as such prior permission for investigation not ' necessary. ‑[Cognizable offence].
Mst. Razia v. The State 1977 P Cr. L J 328 ref.
G.N. Gohar for Petitioner.
Nazir Ahmed Bhatti for A.A.‑G. for the State.
Date of hearing : 24th November, 1979
This is a petition for quashment of proceedings under section 1 6, P.P.C. which were pending in the Court of Malik Zawar Ali, Magistrate at Bahawalpur, at the time of admission of this petition.
2. It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the offence under section 186, P.P.C, being non‑cognizable no investigation could be made without permission of a Magistrate. He relies on the provisions of section 155 (2), Cr. P.C. and has further contended that the Police Officer cannot investigate a non‑cognizable offence without the order of a Magistrate laving powers to try such a case and according to him, in the present case police took cognizance without the order of the Magistrate. Hence, the proceedings would be abuse of the process of Court as the same will not culminate in any conviction because of this legal lacuna. In support of his arguments, the learned counsel has relied on Mst. Razia v. The State (1) in which the proceedings under section 186, P.P.C. having not been initiated on a challan without the permission of the Magistrate were quashed.
3. The State Counsel has opposed the application on the ground that offence under section 186, P.P.C. is not a non‑cognizable offence and, therefore, proceedings initiated by way of a challan are quite competent and cannot be quashed by the present petition. He relies upon a Notifica tion No. Jud. 1‑3 (1)/69 issued under section 10, sub‑clause (1) and published in the Gazette of West Pakistan, Extraordinary, dated 14th March, 1969, which provides as follows :‑
"In exercise of the powers conferred by subsection (1) of. section 10 of the Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1932 (Act XXIII of 1932), the Governor of West Pakistan is pleased to declare that any offence punishable under section 186, 188, 189, 190, 228, 295‑A, 298, 205, 506 or 507 of the Pakistan Penal Code committed in any place in West Pakistan, shall be cognizable."
4. In the case of Mst. Rnaia v. The State (1977 P Cr. L J 328) the amendment mentioned above was not noted by the learned Judge who gave the decision. Therefore, the rule laid down in that case is of no help to the petitioner. Since the offence under section 186, P.P.C. has been made cognizable with effect from 14th March, 1969, the proceedings initiated and investigated by the Police without complying the provisions of section 155, Cr. P.C. are quite lawful. No other argument was pressed into service. The contention raised by the learned counsel has no force. The petition is, therefore, dismissed. The learned Magistrate may now proceed with the trial of the case in accordance with law.
Petition dismissed
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer