Al Wakeelo logo

Al Wakeelo

Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty

Initializing Secure Chambers

2005 PCRLJ 1171

MUHAMMAD HAMID QURESHI VS State

Petitioner: MUHAMMAD HAMID QURESHI VS Respondent: StateHonorable Justice Amir Hani MuslimSaathi M. Ishaque,Fazalur Rahman Awan

Court: Sindh High Court

Full Judgment Text & Judicial Ruling

2005 P Cr

2005 P Cr. L J 1171

[Karachi]

Before Amir Hani Muslim, J

MUHAMMAD HAMID QURESHI and another---Applicants

Versus

THE STATE---Respondent

Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.48 and M.A. No.1004 of 2004, decided on 20th July, 2004.

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)---

----Ss. 561-A, 169 & 265-K---Setting aside order of Trial Court---Application made by Investigating Officer with the concurrence of P.D.S.P. and S.P. Investigation, was submitted before Magistrate concerned who transmitted same to Trial Court---On basis of said report, applicant moved Trial Court under S.265-K, Cr.P.C. but Trial Court dismissed said application without referring the report made under S.169, Cr.P.C.---Trial Court thus, had overlooked report under S.169, Cr.P.C. while rejecting application of applicant made under S.265-K, Cr.P.C.---Investigating Officer had stated that applicants were named in F.I.R. on the basis of statement of co-accused, which statement had not been substantiated by any other material during investigation---Impugned order was set aside and Trial Court was directed to decide matter in the light of report made under S. 169, Cr.P.C. as that aspect had been completely overlooked while passing impugned order---There had to be specific finding on that point, which had not been taken care by the Trial Court.

Saathi M. Ishaque for Applicants.

Fazalur Rahman Awan for the State along with Inspector Gohar Zaman.

ORDER

It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicants that an application under section 169, Cr.P.C. was made by the Investigating Officer, which application was made with the concurrence of the P.D.S.P. and S.P. Investigation. The application was submitted A before the concerned Magistrate who transmitted the same to the trial Court. Apparently, on the basis of this report, applicants have moved the trial Court under section 265-K, Cr.P.C. but the trial Court had dismissed the application without referring the report made under section 169, Cr.P.C. The Investigating Officer states that initially the applicants were named in the F.I.R. No.38 of 2001 lodged with Airport Police Station by the complainant. The Investigating Officer further states that during investigation except the statement of the co-accused Ghulam Muhammad he could not collect any other material, which could connect the applicants with the commission of alleged offence. He submits that, therefore, a report, under section 169, Cr.P.C. was made which was approved by high-ups.

It appears that the learned trial Court has overlooked the 169 Cr.P.C. report, while rejecting the application of the applicants made under section 265-K, Cr.P.C. The main ground of the rejection of the application as it appears from the impugned order is that the applicants were named in the F.I.R. The Investigating Officer states that the applicants were named in the F.I.R. on the basis of statement of co-accused Ghulam Muhammad, which statement has not been substantiated by any other material during investigation. In the circumstances, I set aside the impugned order and direct the trial Court to decide the matter in the light of the report made under section 169, Cr.P.C. as this aspect B has been completely overlooked while passing the impugned order. There has to be specific finding on this point, which has not been taken care by the trial Court. The applicants shall make an application to the trial Court, who after hearing the parties shall pass order afresh considering the report of the Investigating Officer filed under section 169, Cr.P.C. The Investigating Officer present in Court shall also be present during the hearing of the application by the trial Court.

This criminal miscellaneous application along with the listed application stand disposed of in above terms.

H.B.T./M-223/K Order accordingly.

Related Legal Research & Directories