Find a Lawyer

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

✓ Trusted direct lawyer access
Need to speak to a lawyer now?

Unlock direct contact details for up to 10 lawyers so you can call or WhatsApp the right legal professional and move your matter forward with confidence.

☎ Phone and WhatsApp access ⚖ Verified lawyer directory 🔒 Secure payment
⚡ Connect with 10 Lawyers for Rs 1,000
Pay once. Open contact numbers for lawyers matching your legal need.

MUHAMMAD SBAFIQ versus ABDUL HAYEE


Articles 185 (3) Criminal Code of Conduct (V9 1898), Articles 561A and 439 are allowed to consider the question whether Section 561A, the Criminal Procedure Code, has been exercised by the section judge for the use of the Code Whether the latter was worth it or not. 59A9A, Criminal Code of Conduct, with respect to the same subject matter as it has the power to appeal the errors granted in the exercise of the jurisdiction, in particular, when the High Court and the Sessions Judge have the power to amend Were given.

1986 S C M R 1016

Present: Muhammad Haleem, C.J., Muhammad Afzal Zullah, Nasim Hasan Shah, Shafiur Rahman and Zaffar Hussain Mirza, JJ

MUHAMMAD SHAFIQ‑‑Petitioner

versus

ABDUL HAYEE and others‑‑Respondents

Criminal Petition No. 7‑11 of 1986, decided on 3rd March, 1986.

(On appeal from the judgment and order, dated 2‑2‑1986 passed by the Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench, Rawalpindi in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 35/Q of 1985).

(a) Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑

‑‑‑Art. 185(3)‑‑Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), Ss. 561‑A & 439‑A‑‑Leave to appeal granted to consider question as to whether an application under S.561‑A, Criminal Procedure Code was competent after exercise of revisional powers by Sessions Judge under 5.439‑A, Criminal Procedure Code, in regard to same subject‑matter as if it was an appellate power to correct errors in order passed in exercise of revisional jurisdiction, particularly, when concurrent powers of revision were conferred on High Court and Sessions Judge.

(b) Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑

‑‑‑Art. 185(3)‑‑Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), Ss.145 & 146‑ Leave to appeal granted to consider whether orders passed in proceedings conform to Ss.145 & 146, Criminal Procedure Code.

Maulvi Sirajul Haq, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by M.A. Siddiqi, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.

M. Kowkab Iqbal, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondents.

Date of hearing: 5th March, 1986.

ORDER

MUHAMMAD HALEEM, C.J.‑

‑Leave to appeal is granted to consider the following questions:

(i) As to whether an application under section 561‑A, Cr.P C. was competent after the exercise of revisional powers by the Sessions Judge under section 439‑A, Cr.P.C. in regard to the same subject‑matter as if it was an appellate power to correct errors in the order passed in the exercise of revisional jurisdiction, particularly when the concurrent powers of revision are conferred on the High Court and the Sessions Judge, and

(ii) do the orders passed in the proceedings conform to sections 145 and 146, Cr.P.C.

In the meantime, the impugned order is suspended and the disputed property bearing No. U‑218‑A, Mochi Bazar, Rawalpindi, should be attached and continue to remain so till the disposal of the appeal.

M. Y. H. Leave granted.

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
advocate from Shogram 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.