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. 205/Q of 1985, decided on 27th November, 1985.
-‑‑‑S. 561‑A‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 161/409‑‑Prevention of Corruption Act (II of 1947), S. 5(2)‑‑Quashing of proceedings‑‑Case pending before trial Court‑‑Police finding accused innocent‑‑Prosecution proposing to examine witnesses to prove charge‑‑Trial Court, held, could take cognizance even on negative report under S.173, Criminal Procedure Code‑‑Premature to declare proceeding as an abuse of process of Court, held further, Court would not pre‑empt functions of trial Court.
Mian Muhammad Akram Ranjha for Petitioner.
Muhammad Amjad Butt for the State.
This is an application by Muhammad Siddiq petitioner for the quashment of proceedings against him in case under section 161/409, P.P.C. and section 5 of the Prevention of Corruption Act pending decision before the Special Judge, Anti‑Corruption, Sargodha.
2. The charge against the appellant is that he criminally mis appropriated Rs.62,720.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that so far as the petitioner is concerned, it is a case of no evidence; that in an enquiry which was conducted subsequent to the submission of challan, the petitioner was exonerated and that the police has declared the petitioner innocent. The learned counsel for the State has, however, opposed this petition.
4. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties with care. I have not been able to persuade myself to agree with the learned counsel for the petitioner. I find that despite findings of the innocence of the petitioner, by the police, the learned trial Court was quite competent to take cognizance of the case even on a negative report under section 173, Cr.P.C. The prosecution proposes to examine witnesses to prove the charge, so it is premature to declare the proceeding as an abuse of the process of the Court. This Court need not pre‑empt the functions of the trial Court. The submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner do not make out a case for the quashment of the proceeding under section 561‑A, Cr.P.C.
5. For what has been stated above, the petition is dismissed.
S.A. Petition dismissed.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer