MUHAMMAD SHAFI vs MUNIR AHMED and another
This petition was filed under Section 561-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, seeking the quashment of an order passed by an Additional Sessions Judge. The core legal question was whether a revision petition is maintainable against an order of a Judicial Magistrate directing the constitution of a Medical Board for the verification of medical documents and injuries, and whether such an order constitutes a judicial or administrative act. The Court held that the order passed by the Judicial Magistrate for the constitution of a Medical Board is an administrative order rather than a judicial one. Consequently, the Court determined that a revision petition against such an order is not maintainable under the law. The Additional Sessions Judge acted without lawful authority in setting aside the Magistrate's order through a revision petition. The key principle laid down is that an order directing the constitution of a Medical Board for the re-examination of medical evidence is administrative in nature and cannot be challenged through a revision petition; such challenges must be brought through appropriate writ jurisdiction.
- Is an order passed by a Judicial Magistrate for the constitution of a Medical Board considered a judicial or an administrative order?
- Does a revision petition lie against an administrative order passed by a Judicial Magistrate?
- Can an Additional Sessions Judge set aside an administrative order passed by a Judicial Magistrate through a revision petition?
- Section 561-A, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 337-A(iii), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-F(V), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 337-L(ii), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
' SYED ZULFIQAR ALI BOKHARI, J.---This is petition under section 561-A, Cr.P.C. For quashment of proceedings held on 20-4-2009 before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mianchannu by which he accepted criminal revision of respondent No,1 against the order dated 18-2-2009 of Judicial Magistrate, Mianchannu for verification of documents and injuries of Munir Ahmad respondent No, 1.
' Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that respondent No,1 is complainant of case, F.I.R. No, 443 dated 18-10-2008 registered under sections 337-A(iii)/337-F(V)/337-L(ii)/34, P.P.C. Police Station Tulamba, District Khanewal. In the above-said F.I.R. Allegation against the petitioner was levelled. That he injured the complainant with `Sota' which hit on his nose. The complainant was medically examined by the Medical Officer. The petitioner had challenged the injury sustained by the complainant on his nose through application which was accepted by the Judicial Magistrate vide his order dated 18-2-2009 and application for verification of documents and injuries of the complainant was A allowed by the Medical Board. Respondent No, 1/complainant filed a revision against the above-said order before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mianchannu which was allowed vide order dated 20-4-2009 and order passed by Judicial Magistrate for constitution of Medical Board was set aside. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that order passed by Judicial Magistrate for constitution of Medical Board was not a judicial order and the same was an administrative order. No revision lies against that order. The same can only be challenged in writ jurisdiction. Even otherwise there was no occasion for learned Additional Sessions Judge to set aside the order passed by Judicial Magistrate through which an innocent request of the petitioner was allowed as injuries and document of medical evidence were ordered to be re-examined by the Medical Board.
3. Learned counsel for the complainant/respondent No,2 has opposed the arguments of learned counsel for the petitioner. He submits that the earlier application filed by co-accused of the petitioner on the same subject was dismissed as withdrawn. No second application lies by the petitioner. He submits that Board cannot be constituted at belated stage.
4. I have heard the arguments of learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
5. The order dated 18-2-2009 passed by Judicial Magistrate was an administrative order as the same was not a judicial order so no revision lies against that order: Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mianchannu has acted without lawful authority. Even otherwise complainant could not take exception against the orders of re-examine the documents of medical evidence regarding injuries sustained by him through Medical Board if there is no mala fide in the allegation against the petitioner. This petition is "allowed." The impugned order dated 20-4-2009 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mianchannu is set aside being passed without lawful authority as the revision does not lies against the administrative order. Disposed of accordingly.