Pakistan Case Law← Search
1978 P Cr. L J 768

FATEH MUHAMMAD AND 2 OTHERS vs THE STATE AND ANOTHER

Citation1978 P Cr. L J 768
CourtSindh High Court
Case No.Criminal Miscellaneous Application No, 969 of 1976
Date1978-01-15
Judge(s)Mushtaq Ali Kazi
ResultApplication disposed of

ORDER

' This is an application under sections 439 and 561-A, Cr. P. C. For quashment of proceedings started on a direct complaint under the following circumstances.

2. The complaint was filed in the Court of A. C. M. Court No, 9, Karachi against applicants 1, 2 and 3 for offence under section 302 read with section 34, P. P. C. The learned A. C. M. After taking cognizance on the complaint recorded the statement of the complainant under section 200, Cr. P.

C., held preliminary enquiry under section 202, Cr. P. C. Recorded statements of two more witnesses and then passed orders under section 204, Cr. P. C. Ordering bailable warrants against the applicants/respondents 1 to 3.

3. It has been pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioners that the Magistrate had acted without jurisdiction as the case was exclusively triable by the Court of Session.

4. After the amendments of the Cr. P. C. Came into operation the procedure in respect of offences exclusively triable by Court of Session has been completely changed. Under section 190(3), Cr. P. C. a Magistrate takin cognizance on a direct complaint for an offence exclusively triable by Court of Session is required to send the case stiaghtaway to the Court of Session without recording any evidence. Under section 200, Cr. P. C. In such cases the Magistrate is not competent to even examine the complainant but he has to send the complaint to the Court of Session and it is for tha Court after recording statement of the complainant to issue process or to direct a preliminary enquiry. Under section 202(2) of the Code, a Court of Session can direct investigation by the police or the subordinate Magistrate and under section 203 the Sessions Court may, on receiving the complaint, record the statement of the complainant on oath and on consideration of the same may dismiss the complaint.

5. It would, therefore, appear that the learned Magistrate acted without jurisdiction when he examined the complainant on oath under section 200, Cr. P. C. And also held preliminary enquiry under section 202, Cr. P. C. He had also no powers to issue process under section 204, Cr. P. C. The proceedings from the stage of examination of the complainant to the stage of issue of process being without jurisdiction are accordingly quashed. The learned Sessions Judge to whom the complaint has been sent may, therefore, proceed over again from the stage of section 200, Cr. P. C.

And record fresh statement of the complainant under that section and after considering the same may proceed according to law.

6. The revision application is disposed of accordingly. Applicaion disposed of.

For educational and research use only β€” not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.
DisclaimerΒ·PrivacyΒ·TermsΒ·Search