HAMID IQBAL vs ADDITIONAL ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER REVENUE Ss — 2021 PCrLJ 1772 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT

Case information

Citation: 2021 PCrLJ 1772 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURT
Court: Peshawar High Court
Year: 2021
Reporter: PCRLJ
Parties: HAMID IQBAL vs ADDITIONAL ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER REVENUE Ss
Subject matter: Criminal
Provisions referred to: S. 561-A---; Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Food Stuffs Control Act (XX of 1958); Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898); Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Food Stuffs Control Act

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Judgment text as reported

HAMID IQBAL VS ADDITIONAL ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER REVENUE Ss. 3, 6 & 10---Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Food Stuffs Control Act (XX of 1958), Ss. 6 & 9---Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 199---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 561-A--- Constitutional petition---Quashing of proceedings---Scope---Petitioners had challenged their convictions and sentences awarded by Special Magistrate whereby they were sentenced for simple imprisonment for three months and 100,000/ fine under Ss. 6 & 9 of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Food Stuffs Control Act, 1958---Letter dated 27th March 2020 issued by the Section Officer (security-II) of Government of Khyber Pakhtunkhwa Home and Tribal Affairs Department with the Subject, Shopkeepers purportedly involved in hoarding of essential items with name address of the shopkeeper/store owner---Neither the petitioners were named in the list nor any separate application/complaint was made against them---Petitions were produced before Special Magistrate, but when the petitioners were not named in the report/letter issued by the government and when no evidence was available on record against them then how they were entangled was a question mark on the part of authorities---Prosecution could not explain the same candidly conceded that the petitioners were not named in the report, however, added that during the course of investigation/inquiry their names were surfaced---Although, prosecution agitated the issue of involvement of petitioners in the commission of offence yet the analysis of record showed that nothing was brought on record to connect the petitioners with the commission of offence---Petitions were allowed by quashing the impugned orders along with the proceedings against the petitioners, in circumstances.

Other judgments reported in 2021 PCRLJ

2021 PCrLJ 506 PESHAWAR-HIGH-COURTPROFESSOR AKHTAR KHAN VS State S. 497---prevention of electronic Crimes Act (XL of 2016), Ss. 10 & 11---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 109---C…
2021 PCrLJ 1457 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHADIL NADEEM VS State S. 497---prevention of electronic Crimes Act (XL of 2016), S. 22---Child pornography---Bail, refusal of---Delayed FIR--…
2021 PCrLJ 119 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDHSALEEM KHALID VS State S. 497---prevention of electronic Crimes Act (XL of 2016), Ss. 20, 21 & 24---Offences against dignity of natural pers…
2021 PCrLJN 83 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTANABDULLAH alias KHALIQ DAD VS State Ss. 302(b) & 34---Qatl-i-amd, common intention---Appreciation of evidence---Recovery of crime weapon---De…
2021 PCrLJN 2 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTANJAHANZAIB VS State Ss. 11F & 11H---Supply of statements and documents to the accused---Scope---Criminal trial commences with the distributio…
2021 PCrLJN 2 QUETTA-HIGH-COURT-BALOCHISTANJAHANZAIB VS State Ss. 265-E & 221---Plea of guilty---Charge to state offence---Scope---When a person is convicted on a plea of guilty, the…

Back to the case-law library · Search Pakistani case law in Urdu or English