Pakistan Case Lawโ† Search
1993 P Cr. L J 1382

ABDUL WAHEED BAJWA vs THE STATE and another

Citation1993 P Cr. L J 1382
CourtSindh High Court
Case No.Cr. Misc. Application No,630 of 1992
Date1992-09-28
Judge(s)Nazim Hussain Siddiqui
ResultProceedings quashed

1. ' Applicant Abdul Waheed Bajwa, under section 561-A, Cr.P.C., has applied for quashment of proceeding initiated against him, under section 14 of the Sindh Crimes Control Act, 1975, hereinafter called the Act, as per order, dated 10th July, 1992, passed by A.C. And S.D.M., Airport Karachi, East.

2. The facts relevant for decision of this application are as follows:-- ' The case of prosecution is that the applicant is habitual, desperate, and a dangerous criminal. He is involved in seven cases bearing F.I.R. Nos.137/87, 144/87, 5/88, 477/88, 136/89, 310/89 and 39/92, registered at various police stations and is facing trial for the offences, including the offences punishable under sections 124-A, 307 and 382, P.P.C. The applicant has claimed that he is a social and political worker and since oftenly he criticised the local administration and the bureaucrats, he has falsely been involved in the offences of the F.I.R. Mentioned earlier.

3. It is contended on behalf of the applicant that he has already been granted bail in the cases registered on the basis of F.I.R. Mentioned above and that before initiating proceedings the mandatory provisions contained in section 5 of the Act were not complied with. Also, it has been argued that section 14 of the Act is not attracted to the circumstances of this case. Further, it is submitted that mere submission of list of pending cases by itself is not sufficient for initiating proceedings under the Act. In support of these contentions, learned counsel for the applicant cited

(1) Muhammad Ayyub v. The State 1984 P Cr. L J 2889, (2) Sachu alias Sacho-e-Dino v. The State 1984 P Cr. L J 647, (3) Amir Ali and 22 others v. The State 1986 P Cr. L J 30. Learned State counsel frankly conceded the contentions raised on behalf of the applicant and submitted that, in view of non-compliance of the provisions of the Act and utter disregard of the case-law laid down by this Court in various reported cases, the proceedings deserve to be quashed.

Cited by 1 case

For educational and research use only โ€” not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.
DisclaimerยทPrivacyยทTermsยทSearch