Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: KHAIAM HUSSAIN VS Respondent: THE STATE
1997 P Cr
1997 P Cr. L J 92
[Lahore]
Before Rana Muhammad Arshad Khan, J
KHAIAM HUSSAIN and others---Petitioners
Versus
THE STATE and others---Respondents
Criminal Revision No.30 of 1995, decided on 3rd March, 1996
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)---
----Ss. 204 & 439---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 302/324/364/148/149/379/ 411---Order issuing process against accused---Validity---Witnesses in their preliminary evidence had fully corroborated the complainant's statement that the accused had the motive to commit the murder of the deceased and that the same had taken place on account of their abetment ---Accused had been summoned by the Trial Court to face the trial on the basis of said preliminary evidence where they would be given a fair opportunity to defend themselves---Trial Court had passed the impugned order giving reasons with full application of judicious mind which did not suffer from any infirmity---Revision petition was consequently dismissed.
Malik Muntizar Mahhdi for Petitioners.
Rizwan Rehmat Wasti for the State
Altaf Ibrahim Qureshi for the Complainant.
Date of hearing: 3rd March, 1996.
ORDER
This revision petition has been filed calling in question the order, dated 22-9-1994 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Vehari, summoning the petitioners to face the trial in a criminal complaint filed by Mukhtar Ahmed son of Mian Noor Muhammad.
2. The compelling circumstances giving rise to the instant petition are that a private criminal complaint was filed by respondent No.2 herein in the Court of Illaqa Magistrate, Mailsi against as many as eight persons under section 302/ 364/314/379/148/149/109, P.P.C. Since the sections mentioned in the complaint were not triable by the learned Magistrate, he under the law, sent the same to the learned Sessions fudge, Vehari, who entrusted the same to learned Additional Sessions Judge, Vehari. On the receipt of the complaint, learned Additional Sessions Judge, Vehari, recorded preliminary evidence of Mukhtar Ahmad complainant herein, Hafiz Allah Yar and Sajjad Ahmed. The learned trial Court, after recording evidence, through the impugned order, summoned Sajjad Hussain and Khadim Hussain petitioners 1 and 2 respectively to face the trial finding them, prima facie guilty of offence under section 302/324/364/148/149/ 379/411, P.P.C. .
3. A case F.I.R. No.58/93 was registered for committing the murder of Muhammad Iqbal under section 302/324/148/149/379/411, P.P.C. with the Police Station Saddar Mailsi against Mushtaq Hussain, Guftar Shah, Mukhtar, Nasir Shah, Altaf, Khalid Shah, Sajjad Hussain Shah and Khadim Hussain, alleging therein that the murder of Muhammad Iqbal was committed by respondents 1 to 6 in the complaint at the instance of respondents 7 and 8, but the police did not challan Sajjad Hussain and Khadim Hussain Shah as the murder was not committed at their instance and they had not abetted any offence. The respondents to 6 in the complaint were challaned and the same is also pending adjudication
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties as well as the learned Law Officer.
5. The learned counsel for the petitioner has urged to quash the order impugned herein on the ground that Sajjad Hussain Shah and Khadim Hussain petitioners herein, have been summoned to face the trial illegally as there is no evidence on the file against them. Further states that the order has been-passed in a haphazard manner, which is arbitrary and capricious in nature. It has also been urged that the learned trial Court has passed the said order without application of judicious mind.
6. I have perused the record brought before me very carefully. The petitioners have been summoned to face the trial on the basis of the preliminary evidence of the witnesses wherein they very categorically stated that the murder of Muhammad Iqbal deceased had taken place on account of abetment of the petitioners. The motive to commit the murder of Muhammad Iqbal has also been attributed to the petitioners. The contention of the learned counsel that there is no evidence against the petitioners of even abetment, is totally wrong anti misconceived because; the witnesses have fully corroborated the statement of the complainant. The petitioners have been summoned only to face the trial and they shall be given a fair opportunity to defend themselves at the time of the trial. The order has been passed by the trial Court with full application of judicious mind and that too with reasons.
I do not see any infirmity in the order, dated 22-9-1994, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Vehari, whereby the petitioners have been summoned to face the trial and no legitimate exception can be taken of the same.
7. In view of what has been discussed above, no interference is called for Revision petition fails and is dismissed.
N.H.Q./K-17/L??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Petition dismissed.