Find a Lawyer

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

✓ Free WhatsApp lawyer help
Need to speak to a lawyer now?

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.

💬 Instant WhatsApp chat ⚖ Verified lawyer directory ⏰ Replies in minutes

GHULAM RASOOL versus CROWN


Government of India Act of 1935 Government of India Act, 1933 Section 205, 219 Judicial Commissioner's Court in Balochistan for the purposes of Section 205, not the High Court; Is. Government of India Act, which constitutes only the High Courts for the purposes of section 205 of the said Act.

P. L. D. 1950 Baluchistan 29

Before Saker, J. C.

GHULAM RASOOL‑Petitioner

Versus

CROWN‑Respondent

Criminal Miscellaneous No. 14 of 1949, decided on 10th December, 1949.

Government of India Act, 1933----

Ss. 205, 219‑Court of Judicial Commissioner in Balochistan not High Court for purposes of section 205.

The judicial Commissioner's Court in Baluchistan is not included in the list of Courts to section 219 of the Government of India Act which alone constitute High Courts for the purposes of section 205 of the aforesaid Act.

Muhammad Aril, for Petitioner.

Public Prosecutor, for Crown.

ORDER.‑---

This is an application under section 205 of , the Government of India Act, 1935, for the grant of a ' certificate to enable the applicant to file an appeal before the Federal Court of Pakistan against this Courts order of the 29th August. 1949 In Criminal Reference No. 14 of 1949.

It will be seen that section 205 of the Government of India Act is restricted in 'rte application and applies exclusively to those cases in which " a substantial question of law &4 to the interpretation of the Government of India Act or any Order is Council made there under " is involved.

No question of interpretation of the Constitution Act was raised by the petitioner before this Court and dealt with by the latter in its order of 29th August 1.946 against which the petitioner proposes to lodge an appeal in the Federal Court. The learned counsel for the petitioner does not appear to have taken 14 correct view of section 205 of the Constitution Act.

Another consideration which my opinion is, of great significance arid which debars an application of. this nature made to this Court is that the Judicial Commissioner's Court in Baluchistan is not included in the list, of courts in section 219 of the Government of India. Act which alone constitute High Coasts for the purposes of section 205 of the aforesaid Act. 'For the reasons stated above I reject this application and decline To issue the necessary certificate.

K. M. A. Petition dismissed.

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
divorce advocates from Shamsabad 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.
Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes
👋 Need a lawyer? Chat with us free on WhatsApp now.