YAR MAT KHAN vs THE STATE and another
The petitioner sought the quashment of an order dated 21-5-2003 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge-I, Peshawar, whereby his criminal revision petition was dismissed for non-prosecution. The core legal question was whether a criminal revision petition, once admitted to regular hearing, can be lawfully dismissed for non-prosecution in the absence of the petitioner or his counsel. The Peshawar High Court held that once a criminal revision has been admitted to regular hearing, it cannot be dismissed for non-prosecution and must be decided on merits. The Court laid down the principle that upon admission of a criminal revision to regular hearing, the court must proceed to decide the matter on merits rather than dismissing it for default of appearance, particularly when the case was adjourned for the receipt of the record and summoning of the complainant.
- Can a criminal revision petition once admitted to regular hearing be dismissed for non-prosecution?
- Is it incumbent upon the revisional court to decide a criminal revision petition on merits after it has been admitted to regular hearing?
' Petitioner had filed Criminal Revision No,32 of 4-4-2000 in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Peshawar, which was dismissed for non-prosecution vide order, dated 21-5-2003.
Quashment of said order has been sought through petition in hand.
2. Mr. Javed A. Khan, the learned counsel representing the petitioner argued that the revision petition had been admitted to regular hearing and the same could not be dismissed for non- prosecution. Reliance in this regard was placed on Muhammad Hanif v. The State 1991 PCr.LJ 1353.
3. On the other hand Mr. Jamshed Khan, the learned counsel representing the State argued that the learned Court below has passed proper and legal order because in absence of the petitioner or his counsel, the learned Court had no other option but to dismiss the petition for non-prosecution.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record
5. The criminal revision petition filed by the petitioner had been admitted to regular hearing by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Peshawar on 4-4-2000. The petitioner as well as his counsel had been appearing on each date. The learned Court below had requisitioned the record from Police Station Badaber but despite many adjournments,. The record of the said case was not made available to the Court. Even on the preceding date i,e, 26-4-2003, the Court below did not receive the requisite record, hence, S.H.O. Concerned was directed to submit the same without fail for 21-5- 2003 and complainant was directed to be summoned for 21-5-2003, on which date, the revision petition was dismissed for non-prosecution. Since the case has been posted for receipt of the record and summoning the complainant, it was appropriate for the Court below to 'save adjourned the date and on receipt of record and after attendance of the complainant, the revision petition should have been decided on merits. It is by now settled that once a criminal revision is admitted to regular hearing, it cannot be dismissed for non-prosecution as held in Muhammad Hanif v. The State 1991 PCr.LJ 1353.
' I, therefore, allow the petition in hand, set aside the impugned order, dated 21-5-2003. The criminal revision petition filed by the 'petitioner shall be deemed to be pending before the learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Peshawar, who shall on receipt of the record and after service of the complainant, decide the same on merits strictly in accordance with law within a period of 4 months. Parties are directed to appear before the said Court on 10-12-2003. Office is directed to remit the record to the concerned Court before the said date.