' The brief facts out of which the present petition arises are that the petitioner is involved in case F.I.R. No,109 of 2003 which was registered at Police Station Basti Malook, District Multan under section 302/34, P.P.C. On 5-4-2003. The petitioner filed an application before the Additional Sessions Judge, Multan with the prayer for ascertaining the age of Ahmad Nawaz accused (petitioner) for the trial under Juvenile Justice System Ordinance, 2000 which was dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Multan, vide order, dated 11-7-2003.
2. The learned counsel of the petitioner submits that the learned Additional Sessions Judge, erred in law to dismiss the revision petition of the petitioner as the Additional Sessions Judge has no jurisdiction to take the cognizance of the matter in terms of the provisions of the aforesaid Ordinance. He further submits that the impugned order is in violation of the sections 4 and 7 of the said Ordinance. He further urges that it is the duty of the Additional Sessions Judge to refer the case to the competent Court which was constituted under the provisions of the aforesaid Ordinance. In support of his contentions he relied upon Hasan Zafar v. State (2001 PCr.LJ 1939) and Ahmad Ali v. The State (2001 M LD 1191).
3. The learned law officer entered appearance on Court's call, he submits that the revision petition is not maintainable.
4. I have given my anxious consideration to the contention of the leaned counsel of the parties and perused the record.
5. It is admitted fact that the petitioner himself filed the application before the Additional Sessions Judge, therefore, the petitioner has no right to raise objection qua the jurisdiction with regard to maintainability of the application of the petitioner by the Additional Sessions Judge. The petitioner is estopped to raise this objection after dismissing the application by the Additional Sessions Judge, Multan as the law laid down in Ch. Haq Nawaz Chohan v. Ch. Tariq Azam and others (1994 CLC 1530) and Rice Export Corporation of Pakistan (Pvt.) Limited v. Chairman, Sindh Labour Appellate Tribunal and others (1993 PLC 287). The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Multan, dismissed the application with cogent reasons in terms of law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Muhammad Amjal's case PLD 2003 SC 1.
6. It is pertinent to mention here that the petitioner himself as mentioned above, filed an application for ascertaining the age of petitioner before learned Additional Sessions Judge, Multan, who dismissed the same vide order, dated 11-7-2003. The petitioner being aggrieved filed Criminal Miscellaneous No, 73/T-2003 with the prayer for transfer of a case from the Court of Mr. Abdul Sattar, Additional Sessions Judge, Multan to another Court of competent jurisdiction, before this Court, which was dismissed by this Court vide order, dated 23-7-2003, thereafter the petitioner has filed this petition with mala fide intention so that the trial would not be concluded within reasonable time, meaning thereby, the petitioner approached this Court with unclean hands, therefore, the petition is liable to be dismissed as per principle laid down by the Honourable Supreme Court in "Hussain Bano. v. Mrs. Mumtaz Younas" (PLD 1989 SC 346).
7. In view of what has been discussed above, I do not find any infirmity or illegality in the impugned order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Multan. The revision petition has no merit and the same is dismissed.
Revision petition dismissed.