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. 275/Q of 1978, decided on 14th April, 1985.
----Ss. 561-A & 203--Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 379 & 447 read with S. 34--Quashing of proceedings sought on ground that second complaint was not competent as previous complaint was filed under S.203, Cr.P.C.--Trial Court and revisional Court holding that second complaint was competent as first complaint was not heard on merits- Sufficient preliminary evidence existing on record to show prima facie case against accused--Quashing of proceedings refused in circumstances.
Noor Muhammad Khan Chandia for Petitioner.
Islam Ali Qureshi for Respondent.
Date of hearing: 14th April, 1985.
Rahim Bakhsh has moved an application under section 561-A, Cr.P.C. for the quashment of the criminal proceedings lodged against him under sections 379, 447 read with section 34; P.P.C. by Muhammad Bakhsh respondent. The proceedings were stayed by the learned trial Court for awaiting the decision of the civil Court. On the application of Muhammad Bakhsh that he was not heard when the proceedings were stayed, the learned trial Court by means of its order, dated 7-7-1977, decided to continue the proceedings. The main ground taken by the petitioner was that a previous complaint was filed under section 203 Cr.P.C. and a second complaint was not competent. The learned trial Court as well as the learned Sessions Judge, who wielding the revisional powers held that the first complaint was not heard on merits and the second complaint was competent. In the circumstances of the case, when sufficient preliminary evidence exists on the record that the petitioner was prima facie liable under the offence levelled against him and the proceedings were continued. I, therefore, see no merit in this petition for the quashment of the proceedings. The petition stands dismissed. The learned trial Court may be informed of this order.
H.A.K. Petition dismissed.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer