Citation Name: 2023 PCrLJ 93 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD YAR vs GHULAM HAIDER Ss

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

Citation Name: 2023 PCrLJ 93 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD YAR VS GHULAM HAIDER Ss. 200, 202, 204 & 439---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 302, 109, 148 & 149---Private complaint---Issuance of process against accused---Summoning of accused by trial Court to face trial---Power of revision of High Court---Scope---Respondent filed private complaint against the petitioners with the allegation of committing murder of his father---Judicial Magistrate conducted inquiry under S. 202, Cr.P.C. and prepared a positive report, thus petitioners were summoned to face the trial---Validity---For issuance of process for the purpose of summoning the accused in the complaint, law only required availability of sufficient ground as provided under S. 204, Cr.P.C. and not the reasonable grounds---If the court was satisfied with the material placed before it in the shape of complaint, documents annexed with complaint and statements of complainant and witnesses, then process could be issued for summoning the accused for facing trial---In the present case, complainant filed the complaint being eye-witness of the occurrence, got recorded his cursory statement before the Trial Court and then said complaint was sent for inquiry under S. 202, Cr.P.C. before Area Magistrate, who conducted inquiry, recorded statements of two other eye-witnesses and then submitted his inquiry report under S. 202, Cr.P.C., while clearly mentioning in the same that in his considered opinion after going through the record, all the oral as well as documentary evidence of the complainant, the offences under Ss. 302, 148 & 149, P.P.C., were made out, in the light of cursory statements of witnesses including the complainant as well as documents produced by the complainant including post-mortem report and inquiry report, sufficient ground was available on record for proceeding, therefore, Trial Court rightly found that case against the accused persons had been prima facie made out and summoned them for facing the trial---No illegality had been found in the impugned order, therefore, need no interference---Revision petition was without merits and was dismissed accordingly. Citation Name: 2023 PCrLJ 93 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD YAR VS GHULAM HAIDER Ss. 200 & 202---Private complaint, filing of---Limitation---Delay in filing private complaint---No time period had been provided in the law for filing the complaint and it is common practice that the aggrieved person will first approach the police for redressal of his grievance through registration of the case, if remained dissatisfied, then will file application under S. 22-A(6), Cr.P.C., before Ex-Officio Justice of Peace and sometime could also invoke constitutional jurisdiction for registration of the case and usually complaint was filed as a last resort---Delay by itself in filing the complaint could not be taken as fatal to reject the evidence in support thereof, which might otherwise be entitled to credence---Delay in filing the complaint was examined in the light of peculiar facts and circumstances of each case.

Citation Name: 2023 PCrLJ 93 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHOREBookmark this Case MUHAMMAD YAR vs GHULAM HAIDER Ss — 2023 PCrLJ 93 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2023 PCRLJ