ABDUL HAMEED vs NISAWAR HAYAT and another
This appeal challenges a judgment of the Shariat Court which dismissed a criminal revision petition as incompetent. The appellant had been summoned by the Tehsil Criminal Court after that court disagreed with a police report under Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, which had declared the appellant innocent in a case registered under Sections 324 and 337-F of the Azad Penal Code. The Shariat Court had refused to entertain the revision petition against the trial court's summoning order. The Supreme Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir examined Section 25 of the AJ&K Islamic Penal Laws (Enforcement) Act, 1974, which governs appeals and revisions from Tehsil Criminal Courts. The Supreme Court held that the trial court's order was an interim order and was clearly revisable by the Shariat Court under the provisions of the Act. Consequently, the Supreme Court set aside the Shariat Court's judgment and remanded the case for a decision on merits, establishing that interim orders of the Tehsil Criminal Court are subject to revision before the Shariat Court.
- Is an order of a Tehsil Criminal Court summoning an accused after disagreeing with a police report considered an interim order?
- Does the Shariat Court have the jurisdiction to entertain a revision petition against an interim order passed by a Tehsil Criminal Court under the AJ&K Islamic Penal Laws (Enforcement) Act, 1974?
- Section 324, Azad Penal Code
- Section 337-F, Azad Penal Code
- Section 173, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 25, AJ&K Islamic Penal Laws (Enforcement) Act, 1974
' MUHAMMAD AZAM KHAN, C.J.---The captioned appeal has been filed against the judgment of the Shariat Court dated 23rd February, 2009, whereby Criminal Revision Petition No,24 of 2008 from an order passed by Tehsil Criminal Court Kotli on 27th February, 2008, has been dismissed.
2. Necessary facts for the disposal of instant appeal are that a case under sections 324, 337-F APC was registered at Police Station Kotli on 25th March, 2007 on a report made by respondent No,1 against the accused-appellant. After necessary investigation, the police submitted report under section 173, Cr.P.C. In Tehsil Criminal Court Kotli declaring the accused-appellant innocent. The trial Court disagreed with the police investigation and summoned the accused-appellant. Feeling aggrieved, he filed a revision petition in the Shariat Court. A learned single Judge in the Shariat Court dismissed the revision petition being incompetent.
3. Mr. Muhammad Reaz Alam, the learned counsel for the appellant, argued that the judgment of the Shariat Court is not maintainable. The judgment passed by the Tehsil Criminal Court can be assailed through revision before the Shariat Court under section 25 of AJ&K Islamic Penal Laws (Enforcement) Act, 1974. The learned Judge in the Shariat Court has applied incorrect law while declaring that the revision petition against the order of Tehsil. Criminal Court is not competent.
4. Raja Ghazanfar Ali Khan, the learned Advocate-General, accepted the position that the Shariat Court has not applied correct law.
5. While controverting the arguments Mr. Muhammad Ayub Sabir, the learned counsel for respondent No,1, argued that the judgment of the Shariat Court is perfectly legal. The order passed by the trial Court was not revisable by the Shariat Court. He requested for dismissal of appeal.
6. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. The case was registered under sections 324 and 337-F, A.P.C. These offences are triable by Tehsil Criminal Court.
After investigation, the police found the appellant innocent and submitted report under section 173, Cr.P.C. In Tehsil Criminal Court Kotli for discharge of accused from the alleged offence. The Tehsil Criminal Court disagreed with the investigation and ordered for summoning the accused- appellant herein. This order was challenged by the appellant by way of revision petition in the Shariat Court. Section 25 of the AJ&K Islamic Penal Laws (Enforcement) Act, 1974 deals with the appeals, revisions and transfer of cases. Subsection (2) of section 25 of the said Act is relevant for the purpose and it will be useful to reproduce the same:-- {{URDU TEXT}} ' A perusal of aforesaid provision of law shows that any interim order or judgment of Tehsil Criminal Court can be challenged by way of a revision petition in the Shariat Court. The order passed by the Tehsil Criminal Court was an interim order and under the aforesaid provision of law it was revisable by the Shariat Court. The learned single Judge in the Shariat Court failed to apply correct law.
7. The result of above discussion is that we accept the appeal, set aside the judgment passed by the Shariat Court on 23rd February, 2009 and remand the case to the Shariat Court for decision on merits.