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 Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 52‑P of 1978, decided on 13th May 1979.
(On appeal from the judgment and order .of the Peshawar High Court, dated 21‑5‑1978, in Cr. M. No. 254 of 1978).
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑
--‑‑ S. 561‑A‑Quashment of proceedings‑Petition for quashment of proceedings dismissed by High Court on ground of its being premature due to no evidence having been recorded till then and respective stands of parties could not be put to test‑No mistake in impugned order pointed out‑Petitioner's counsel putting forward some argument but ‑ on realising that exercise contemplated by him instead of bringing any relief to his client might involve him not pressing point further and feeling satisfied to rest matter where left by High Court Petition in circumstances dismissed.‑[Quashment of proceedings].
M. Saeed Baig, Advocate Supreme Court and M. Qasim Imam, Advocate- on‑Record for Petitioner.
Nemo for Respondents.
Date of hearing : 13th May 1979.
.‑Haji Muhammad Khan, Timber Merchant, (hereinafter called the complainant) filed a complaint against Muhammad Ahsan petitioner under sections 406, 419 and 420, P. P. C. for having cheated him by issuing three spurious cheques at a time when he had no balance in his account and for which he made no deposit even later on. The complaint was referred by the learned .Magistrate under section 202, Cr. P. C. to the police for report or for recording the statements of concerned witnesses. The police after doing the needful submitted the case to the Magistrate who thereafter issued process against the petitioner. Muhammad Ahsan (accused) did not appear and later on non‑bailable warrant was issued for his arrest. He was consequently apprehended and is now on bail.
2. Muhammad Ahsan accused filed a petition being Criminal Mis cellaneous No. 254 of 19'78' under section 561‑A, Cr. P. C. for quashment of the proceedings filed against him as aforesaid. The petition was dismissed by a learned Single Judge of the Peshawar High Court on 21‑5‑1978 on the ground that at the present it was premature as no evidence as yet had been recorded and the respective stand of the parties therefore could not be put to test. For this proposition he relied upon a judgment of this Court reported in Raja Haq Nawaz v. Muhammad Afzal and. 4 others (P L D 1967 S C 354).
3. The accused has come up in a petition for special leave to appeal against the same to this Court.
4. We have heard the learned counsel but he was unable to point out any mistake in the impugned order. His main submission was that there were according to him certain circumstances on the basis of which some opinion on the merits of the case could have been formed in favour; of his client but soon realizing that the exercise contemplated by him if; done at this stage instead of bringing any relief to his client might involve him he did not press his point further and felt satisfied to rest the matter where it has been left by the High Court.
5. The result is that this petition has no merit and is dismissed.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer