MAHMOOD AHMAD vs ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE, GUJRANWALA and 2
This matter comes before the Lahore High Court through a petition challenging orders passed in connection with criminal proceedings. The core legal question concerns the competence of the complainant to lodge the case at the relevant time without proper authority and whether retrospective effect can be given to penal provisions. The court heard the contentions of the parties, noting the submission of the Additional Advocate-General that the complainant lacked the authority to lodge the complaint at the material time and that penal provisions cannot be applied retrospectively. Accepting these submissions, the court allowed the petition, set aside the impugned orders, and quashed the pending proceedings against the petitioner. The key principle laid down is that criminal proceedings initiated by a person lacking authority at the time, and based on penal provisions that cannot operate retrospectively, are liable to be quashed.
- Whether a writ petition can be filed against a revisional order passed by the Court of Session?
- Can retrospective effect be given to a penal provision?
- Are criminal proceedings liable to be quashed if the complainant had no authority to lodge the case at the relevant time?
- Section 561-A, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
' KHAWAJA MUHAMMAD SHARIF, J.---In continuation of my earlier order dated 4-4-2005, the learned Additional Advocate-General Punjab, Ch. Muhammad Hanif Khatana submits that according to (PLD 1993. SC 399) no writ petition can be filed, against the revisional order passed by the learned Court of Session. However, further submits that , ground (iii) of the petition is legal one because at the time of lodging of the case, the complainant had no authority to do so. Adds that according to the settled law of this Court, retrospective effect cannot be given to a penal provisions.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the scope of a petition under section 561-A, Cr.P.C. Is wider than a writ petition. He placed reliance on (1996 PCr.LJ 200).
3. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have also given consideration to the submissions made at the bar.
4. As Ch. Muhammad Hanif Khatana, the learned Additional Advocate-General Punjab, to be fair to him, has not controverted the submissions made by the leaned counsel for the petitioner and submitted that the complainant had no authority to lodge the complaint at the relevant time and that no retrospective effect can be given to a penal provision and as I am also convinced with the submissions of the learned counsel for the" petitioner, this petition is allowed, the impugned orders are set aside and the proceedings pending against the petitioner, on the subject-matter, before respondent No.2, are hereby quashed.