PAK LAW GPT — Pakistan Case Law AI justice scale emblemPAK LAW GPTCase law · Urdu & English

Syed Muhammad Shabbar Zaidi vs Syed Asad Hussain Rizvi Ss — 2026 YLR 671 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Citation
2026 YLR 671 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH
Court
Sindh High Court
Year
2026
Reporter
YLR
Parties
Syed Muhammad Shabbar Zaidi vs Syed Asad Hussain Rizvi Ss
Subject matter
Criminal
Provisions referred to
S. 179; S. 439; Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

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

Syed Muhammad Shabbar Zaidi VS Syed Asad Hussain Rizvi Ss. 439, 561-a & 179---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 499, 500, 501, 120-a & 34---Defamation, printing or engraving matter known to be defamatory, criminal conspiracy, common intention---Quashing of orders---Jurisdiction of the Court---Scope---Trial Court took cognizance of the offences against the applicants---Validity---applicants allegedly mentioned derogatory remarks against the complainant in a complaint---In the instant case, record reflected that the alleged defamatory matter was in the form of JCM-(Judicial Companies Miscellaneous), which was filed in the High Court---Complainant was not a party to the JCM before the High Court---No notice was issued to the complainant in the JCM proceedings and the alleged defamatory material was never served by the accused persons upon the complainant---Hence, neither the JCM was published in T-(Thatta), nor was it served by the accused on the complainant in "T" nor was it intended by the accused to be read in "T" ---Complainant's reading of the defamatory content at "T", or having come to know of the alleged defamatory matter at "T", would not constitute an ingredient of the offence and it would not constitute a consequence ensued, because the alleged offence itself was completed at K-(Karachi) where the JCM was filed before the High Court---Moreover, it was the 'consequence ensued' which was the core ingredient for attracting jurisdiction under S.179 Cr.P.C.---In these facts therefore, the Court at "T" had no jurisdiction to inquire into or to try the matter or take cognizance in the matter---Neither merits nor evidence of the case were being decided, but only the illegal exercise of jurisdiction under S.179 Cr.P.C. was being discussed herein in revisional jurisdiction under S.439 Cr.P.C.---applications were allowed by setting aside the impugned orders.

Other judgments reported in 2026 YLR

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