Find a Lawyer

Every Lawyer listed in this directory is verified by SJP verification Team

✓ Free WhatsApp lawyer help
Need to speak to a lawyer now?

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.

💬 Instant WhatsApp chat ⚖ Verified lawyer directory ⏰ Replies in minutes

HAJI MUHAMAMD UMAR KHAN versus HOTI CORPORATION, LAHORE


Pakistan Penal Code Sections 500 and 501 Criminal Procedure Code (v. 1898), section 253 (2) revised against the order of the trial court, refusing to exclude the accused under section 253 (2), CRPC private complaint In connection with the case, the accused's lawyer did not die. Registrar of the High Court registrar received the complaint letter after the Registrar High Court's statement did not appear nor complainant was present. A compromise has been reached between them and they want to withdraw the application

1985 P Cr. L J 2529

[Lahore]

Before Rustam S. Sidhwa, J

Haji MUHAMAMD UMAR KHAN Petitioner

Versus

HOTI CORPORATION, LAHORE and another Respondents

Criminal Revision No.1187 of 1974, heard on 4th June, 1985.

Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

‑‑‑Ss. 500 & 501‑‑Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S.253(2)‑ Revision against order of trial Court, refusing to discharge accused under S.253(2), Cr.P.C. in respect of private complaint‑‑Counsel of accused died‑‑Neither accused nor complainant appearing despite issuance of registered notices‑‑Registrar of High Court receiving a letter of accused stating therein that a compromise had been effected between parties and desiring to withdraw petition‑‑Petition dismissed for non‑prosecution in circumstances.

Nemo for Petitioner.

Nemo for Respondent No. 1.

Shabbir Lali, for A.‑G. for the State.

Date of hearing: 4th June, 1985.

ORDER

This is a revision petition filed by Haji Muhammad Umar; petitioner, against the order of a First Class Magistrate of Lahore, dated 23‑10‑1971 refusing to discharge the petitioner under section 253(2), Cr.P.C. in respect of a private complaint filed by Hoti Corporation, respondent, against him under section 500/501, P.P.C.

2. Mr. Mahmood Ahmad Qureshi, Advocate for the petitioner, having died, registered A.D. notices were issued to Haji Muhammad Umar, the petitioner, and Hoti Corporation, respondent, for today's date of hearing, but nobody has turned up on their behalf. However, a letter purpoting to be to have been written by Haji Muhammad Umar Khan petitioner, to the Registrar of this Court has been received, which has been placed on the file, which states that a settlement having been arrived at and a compromise having been effected between the parties, the petitioner desires to withdraw from the prosecution of this petition. Mr. Shabbir Lali, Advocate, appears for the State. In view of the letter referred to above and the fact that nobody appears on behalf of the petitioner to prosecute this petition, this petition is dismissed for non‑prosecution..

H. A. K.

Revision dismissed.

Find a Lawyer Near You

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

🔍 Find a Lawyer
Popular cities: Lahore· Karachi· Islamabad· Rawalpindi· Multan· Faisalabad
family advocate from Kharan lawyer

SJP Lawyers DirectorySJP Lawyers Directory

Pakistan's leading legal-technology platform and verified lawyer directory — connecting clients, lawyers, law firms and Bar Associations across the country.

Get in Touch

© 2018–2027 SJP Legnocrats (SMC-Private) Limited. All rights reserved.
Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes
👋 Need a lawyer? Chat with us free on WhatsApp now.