MAHMOOD AHMED vs ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE, GUJRANWALA and 2
This matter comes before the Lahore High Court in the second round of litigation arising from a criminal complaint filed against the petitioner. The core legal question concerns whether the complainant, Dr. Jamil Ahmad, possessed the requisite legal authority to lodge a complaint against the petitioner under the relevant statutory framework. The court examined Section 10 of the Allopathic System (Prevention of Misuse) Ordinance, 1962, alongside an administrative letter dated 15th July 1997 issued by the Government of Punjab. The court held that the complainant was not authorized to lodge the complaint, as the time-bound administrative directives had long expired by the time the complaint was instituted in December 1999, and no subsisting notification or statutory delegation existed to empower him. Consequently, the petition was accepted, the impugned orders were set aside, and the pending proceedings against the petitioner were quashed. The key principle laid down is that a private or official complaint instituted without statutory authorization or under expired administrative directives is legally unsustainable and liable to be quashed.
- Whether a complainant has the legal authority to file a complaint under the Allopathic System (Prevention of Misuse) Ordinance, 1962 without explicit statutory authorization?
- Can an administrative letter or time-bound notification be applied retrospectively to validate a criminal complaint filed long after its expiry?
- Are proceedings based on an unauthorized complaint liable to be quashed by the High Court?
- Section 10, Allopathic System (Prevention of Misuse) Ordinance, 1962
ORDER
' KHAWAJA MUHAMMAD SHARIF, J.---This is second round of litigation. Earlier this Court had quashed the instant complaint on the ground that complainant Dr. Jamil Ahmad had no authority to file a complaint against the petitioner, thereafter, Dr. Jamil Ahmad filed petition for special leave to appeal before the apex Court, in which, Hon'ble apex Court directed that Dr. Jamil Ahmad should also be heard as the order was passed on his back.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Dr. Jamil Ahmad was not authorized to lodge the F.I.R. And then to file the complaint because it is a clear violation of section 10 of Allopathic System (Prevention of Misuse) Ordinance, 1962.
3. On the other hand, learned counsel for Dr. Jamil Ahmad has submitted a letter issued by Chief Secretary, Government of Punjab, Health Department to all the Commissioners and Deputy Commissioners in the Punjab, dated 15th July, 1997, relevant portion of the same is reproduced below:-- "A team of three members at District level comprising District Health Officer or Deputy District Health Officer, Drug Inspector and Magistrate be constituted. The team should work on war looting for 5 months/Drug Inspector will prosecute the quacks for keeping drugs without Drug Sale Licence and without warranties in the Drug Court and also seal the premises so that offence may not continue to be committed. District Health Officers/Deputy District Health Officers should prosecute the quacks under the Allopathic System Ordinance, 1962, in the Court of 1st Class Magistrate."
4. On the other hand, learned Addl. A.G. Concedes the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner and further submits that F.I.R. Lodged on this issue was also found to be false and the same was cancelled.
5. After having heard learned counsel for the parties and going through the documents available on record, I am of the considered opinion that Dr. Jamil Ahmad was not authorized to lodge the instant complaint according to section 10 of Allopathic system (Prevention of Misuse) Ordinance, 1962 and also according to letter issued by Chief Secretary, Government of Punjab, Health Department to all the Commissioners and Deputy Commissioners in, the Punjab, dated 15th July, 1997 because these six months were expired in December, 1997 while the instant complaint was lodged on 9-12-1999 and at that time there was no order either from District Health Officer or Deputy District Health Officer or any notification by the Federal Government or by the Provincial Government in this regard and moreover that letter cannot be used retrospectively, therefore, this petition is accepted, impugned orders are set aside and the proceedings pending against the petitioner, on the subject-matter, before respondent No.2 are hereby quashed.