Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: THE STATE VS Respondent: MASROOR AHMAD QURESHI And Others
Court Name: Lahore High Court Judge(s): Muhammad Munir Khan Title: THE STATE vs MASROOR AHMAD QURESHI And Others Case No.: Criminal Appeal No. 654 of 1984 Date of Judgment:1986-02-02 Reported As: 1986 P Cr. L J 2320 Result: Appeal dismissed
Judgment ORDER This Criminal Appeal against acquittal filed by the State, arises from the judgment of the learned Special Judge, Anti-Corruption, Lahore whereby he on 24-5-1984, while dropping proceedings against the respondents under section 420/468/471/201/109, P.P.C. Read with section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1947 discharged them of bail bonds. 2. Since after hearing the learned counsel for the parties 1 feel inclined to dismiss the appeal on the ground of non-maintainability, so I need not set out the facts in detail and enter into the merits of the case. I find that the learned Special Judge Anti-Corruption has passed the following order:-- "As a result of the above, I hold that this Court has no jurisdiction to proceed with this case as the complaint was not filed by the person competent under section 29 of the Act XV111 of 1958. The proceedings in hand are accordingly dropped Muhammad Saleem, Ghulam Mustafa, Suhail Ahmed, Abdul Haq. Manzoor Ahmad, Sh. Muhammad Abdullah, Muhammad Ayyub Gohar and Muhammad Ilyas accused are on bail. The bail bonds 'are discharged." From the order reproduced above, it is very much obvious that the accused persons have not been acquitted within the meaning of sections 245/265-H, 248 and 249-A, Cr.P.C. And proceedings have simply been dropped against them. In this view of the matter, I am convinced that appeal against acquittal does not lie and the same is, therefore dismissed.