Lawyers Directory Listing
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.
Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 109 of 1986, decided on 12th November, 1986.
‑‑‑Ss. 561‑A, 107, 151 & 112‑‑Quashing of proceedings‑‑Magistrate passing impugned order under S. 112, Cr.P.C., against accused which expired during pendency of petition before High Court‑‑Order set aside, bail bond discharged and proceedings against accused quashed.
P L D 1958 Kar. 646; A I R 1937 Sind 26 and 1984 P Cr. L J 2425(1) and 1986 P Cr. L J 349 rel.
S. Madad Ally Shah for Applicant.
Syed Sarfraz Ahmad, A.A.‑G. for the State.
Ahmed has filed this petition under section 561‑A, Cr.P. Code for quashment of the proceedings pending against him under section 107/151, Cr.P.C. including order under section 112, Cr.P. Code before the learned Sub‑Divisional Magistrate, City, Hyderabad.
The facts of the case are that S.H.O. Cantonment P.S. Hyderabad submitted report under section 107/151, Cr.P. Code on 29‑7‑1985. The allegation in report is that complainant Hamid and the petitioner are residing in the same village and they have dispute ovel and they fought with each other earlier. It is further alleged that there is apprehension of breach of peace and likelihood of bloodshed at the site.
The petitioner was arrested on 28‑7‑1985 under section 151, Cr.P.C. and was produced before the learned Sub‑Divisional Magistrate. The learned Sub‑Divisional Magistrate passed an order under section 112, Cr.P.C. and remanded him to custody but the petitioner was released on bail. The impugned order expired during the pendency of this petition.
Mr. Syed Madad Ally Shah the learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the impugned order expired during the pendency of the above petition and as such may be set aside. In support of this contention the learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon cases reported in PLD 1958 Kar. 646, A I R 1937 Sind 26, 1984 PCr.LJ 2425(1) and 1986 P Cr. L J 349.
The learned A.A.‑G. conceded the above legal position and has stated that this petition has become infructuous.
In view of the above, I allow the above petition and set aside order, dated 29‑7‑1985 under section 112, Cr.P.C. passed by the Sub‑Divisional Magistrate, City Hyderabad and discharge the bail bond executed by the petitioner. Proceedings if still pending are quashed.
The above petition stands disposed of in terms of the above order.
M.Y.H./A‑25/K Order accordingly.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer