Find a Lawyer

Criminal Revision No. 44 of 1982, decided on 10th March, 1982.

‑‑ Evidence, appreciation of --‑ Trial Court convicting petitioner under S. 341, Penal Code for which he was not challaned by Police at all---Even otherwise no case under .S. 341, Penal Code made out against petitioner either from evidence on record or F. I. R.‑Convict ion and sentence set aside, in circumstances--- Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 341.

Muhammad Hanif for Petitioner.

Rafique Mahmood Khan, Addl. A.‑G. for the State.

Date of institution : 4th February, 1982.

Muhammad Yunus and Badder Munir petitioners were challaned by the Police in ‑the District Criminal Court Muzafarabad under sections 20 and 21 of the Islaami Tazeerati Act. The case was accordingly tried by that Court. The trial Court came to the conclusion that no offences under the aforesaid sections could be proved by the prosecution and as such they were acquitted of the charges under sections 20 and 21 of the Islaami Tazeerati Act. But at the same time after acquitting the accused‑peti tioners, the trial Court convicted Muhammad Yunus petitioner under section 341, P. C. for which he was not challaned by the police at all.

After hearing the counsel for the parties and going through the record I feel that the trial Court was not justified in convicting and sentencing the petitioner under section 341, P. C. for which no case was put in against him by the prosecution. Otherwise too there is no case made out even under section 341, P. C. against the petitioner from the evidence brought on record ; and even the F. I. R. does not disclose this offence against the petitioner. Therefore, this revision petition is accepted and the conviction and the sentence passed on the petitioner under section 341, P. C. are hereby set aside.

So far the prayer for the delivery of the truck to the petitioner is concerned, it is not based on a solid ground. Muhammad Yunus has stated before me that the truck in question was in possession of the complainant at the time when the alleged incident was reported to have taken place. The counsel for the petitioner does not now press his prayer with regard to the point for delivery of the truck which was seized by the Police. The truck at present is in possession of the very person who had its possession at the time the alleged occurrence was attributed to the petitioners. This may be a civil dispute to be determined by a civil Court, when the matter in relation to the ownership of the truck is disputed between the parties. This revision petition is disposed of accordingly and the fine if paid by Muhammad Yunus petitioner, shall be refunded to him.

Order accordingly.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.