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 Reference No. 119 of 1960, decided on 22nd July 1960.
Ss 110, 118 & 561‑A‑‑Notice to furnish security for good behaviour "for one year "Respondents committed to jail‑Re‑trial ordered on appeal‑Period of notice expiring pending re‑trial‑Proceedings quashed under S. 561‑A‑Fresh proceedings only on fresh information.
Khalid Ishaq, A. A. G. for the State.
Rashid Akhtar Qureshi for Respondents.
Date of hearing: 22nd July 1960.
Shafi Muhammad and others were called upon to slow cause why they should not be ordered to furnish security for being of good behaviour for a period of one year on the 26th November, 1958. It is said that these persons did not. Challenge the police report. Their pleas were recorded and they were sent to jail.
Shafi Muhammad alone appealed to the District Magistrate on the ground that he was not given an opportunity of being heard. His plea was accepted by the District Magistrate and he ordered the retrial of all the five persons on the 30th March 1959. The case was transferred to the Court of the City Magistrate, Sukkur where for 9 months the proceedings dragged on and nothing was done.
On 22nd January, 1960 an order under section 112, Cr. P. C. was read out to these persons.
It has been brought to the notice of this Court during an inspection that proceedings in this case have taken too long a time and ought to be quashed. Firstly it appears that in this case the order to furnish security was passed on 26th November 1958 and since then all these 5 persons have been in jail. The period of one year expired on November 25, 1959. It also appears that Shafi Muhammad' is no longer within the, jurisdiction of the Magistrate who is trying the case.
In view of the fact that these persons have served out sentence of one year in jail, I am of the opinion that the proceedings should be quashed under section 561‑A. The proceedings are accordingly quashed.
This order will not bar any fresh proceedings that may be taken against these persons on fresh information received by the authority concerned.
K. B. A. Proceedings quashed.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer