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 Revision No. 31 of 1981, decided on 20th April, 1983.
‑‑-- S. 494‑Withdrawal of case‑Trial court allowing withdrawal of case without application of mind‑Ground for withdrawal as mentioned in application "in interest of justice" without any further details ---Withdrawal order set aside and ease remanded for decision according to law.
P L D 1978 Kar. 371 ; P L D 1976 Lah. 1593 and P L D 1977 S C 451 ref.
Aftab Ahmad Alvi for Applicant.
Rashid Tariq for the State.
Date of hearing : 20th April, 1983.
The applicant above‑named, being aggrieved by order dated 28th February 1981 of the learned A. C. M. Court No. 11 (South), Karachi, passed in Cr. Case No. 222/80, by which prosecution was permitted to withdrawal from the prosecution of the said case, has preferred the above petition, on the facts and grounds mentioned in the memo. of above petition.
The learned Advocate for the applicant in support of the above petition submitted, that the learned A. P. P. in his application under section 494, Cr. P. C. has given no cogent reasons for withdrawing from prosecution and furthermore the learned trial Court, without applying its mind, granted the said application, in utter violation of the provisions of section 494, Cr. P. C. while applicant's application under section 494, Cr. P. C. dated 7th February 1981 was pending disposal. In support of this contention, the learned Advocate for the applicant has relied upon cases reported in P L D 1978 Kar. 371 and P L D 1976 Lah. 1593.
The learned Advocate appearing for the State at the outset submitted, that he was supporting the above petition, as the learned trial Court without applying its mind accorded permission for withdrawal from the prosecution, in utter disregard of the law laid down by the Honourable Supreme Court in case reported in P L D 1977 S C 451.
I have carefully considered the above submissions made by the learned Advocates before me and have gone through the application under section 494, Cr. P. C. filed by the State as well as application under section 495, Cr. P. C. made by the applicant, as well as the F. I. R. in question, on the basis of which the prosecution in question was started.‑
I find that the learned Magistrate obviously not applied his mind to the application under section 494, Cr. P. C. made by the learned A. P. P. which is clear from his short order. Furthermore I find, that the ground for withdrawal from prosecution as mentioned in application under section 494, Cr. P. C. is said to be "in the interest of justice" without specifying further what is meant by interest of justice. In view of this the cases cited by the learned Advocate for the applicant as well as by the learned Advocate for the State are fully applicable to the present case and as such I allow the above petition and set aside order dated 28th February 1981 passed by the learned A. C. M. Court No. 11 (South), Karachi, on State's application under section 494, Cr. P. C. and remand back the case to the learned trial Court for disposal on merits, in accordance with the laws. I further direct the learned trial Court, in view of .the facts of the present case to consider applicant's application under section 494, Cr. P. C. before proceeding with the case in question on merits.
The above petition stands disposed of in the terms of the above order.
Case remanded.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer