MAZHAR IQBAL vs State S — 2022 PCrLJ 1652 HIGH-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIR

Case information

Citation: 2022 PCrLJ 1652 HIGH-COURT-AZAD-KASHMIR
Year: 2022
Reporter: PCRLJ
Parties: MAZHAR IQBAL vs State S
Subject matter: Criminal
Provisions referred to: S. 561-; S. 16; S. 2

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

MAZHAR IQBAL VS State S. 561-a---Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) act (IV of 1985), Ss. 11, 14 & 16---allegation of using intoxicant---Petition for quashing of FIR---Scope---Petitioners sought quashing of FIR lodged against them, for being intoxicated at the relevant time, but for searching the car of petitioners, no search warrant was obtained by the police from the Judicial Magistrate---Medical report had not been prepared and issued as per procedure, thus the FIR was liable to be quashed---Validity---Section 16 of the Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) act, 1985 was self-explanatory, which made it clear that the offences under Ss. 4, 8 & 11 of the Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) act, 1985, shall be cognizable only if those were committed at a public place---During patrol, when the police apprehended the accused-petitioners, they were riding a car and raiding police party found smell of alcohol coming from their mouths and no intoxicant liquid was recovered from their possession during search---admitted fact that when the offence was stated to have been committed, accused-petitioners were riding a car, which did not fall within the definition of "public place" as such the police was not competent to take cognizance of the offences---Cognizance in offences under Ss. 11/14 of the Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) act, 1985 taken by the police was violation of S. 16 read with S. 2(l) of the act, Ibid---action by the police in registration of criminal case against the accused-applicants in offences mentioned above appeared to have been found without jurisdiction and without lawful authority---Petition was allowed and FIR was quashed, in circumstances.

Other judgments reported in 2022 PCRLJ

2022 PCrLJ 296 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORESAEED VS State art. 22---Identification parade---Object---accused not known previously---Effect---If complainant does not know accused prior…
2022 PCrLJ 203 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORESHERAZ KHAN VS State S. 50---General Clauses Act (X of 1897), S. 26---Provision as to offences punishable under two or more enactments---Rel…
2022 PCrLJ 259 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREROHAN AHMAD VS State S. 497---Expressions "appears" and "brought"---Scope---Expression "appears" means appears in response to a summon by Co…
2022 PCrLJ 203 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORESHERAZ KHAN VS State Preamble, Ss. 27, 28, 30, 36, 44 & 50---Legal recognition of offences committed in relation to information system, Paki…
2022 PCrLJ 259 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREROHAN AHMAD VS State Ss. 344 & 497---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 295-B, 298-C, 120-B, 34 & 109---prevention of electronic Crimes Act (XL o…
2022 PCrLJ 203 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORESHERAZ KHAN VS State Preamble, Ss. 27, 28, 30, 36, 44 & 50---Legal recognition ofoffences committed in relation to information system, Pakis…

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