MUHAMMAD YOUSUF vs The STATE
This petition for leave to appeal challenged a judgment of the Lahore High Court, which had dismissed the petitioner's application under Section 561-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 seeking the quashment of criminal proceedings pending against him before the Special Judge, Anti-Corruption. The petitioner, a government school teacher, contended that the Special Judge lacked jurisdiction to try the case and that certain remarks in the High Court's judgment were prejudicial to his fair trial. The Supreme Court held that the question of guilt under the relevant provisions of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 and the Prevention of Corruption Act 1947 must be determined by the trial court based on evidence. Furthermore, the Court dismissed the apprehension of prejudice, noting the High Court's explicit observation that the trial judge should decide the case on its merits without being influenced by the High Court's remarks. Consequently, the petition was found to be without substance and was dismissed.
- Does a Special Judge, Anti-Corruption, have jurisdiction to try a government servant for offenses under the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 and the Prevention of Corruption Act 1947?
- Can a petition for quashment under Section 561-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 be granted solely on the basis of apprehended prejudice from a High Court's observations?
- Should a trial court be influenced by remarks made by a High Court in a judgment dismissing a petition for quashment?
- Section 561-A, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 382, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 161, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 165, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 5(2), Prevention of Corruption Act 1947
ORDER
1. S. A. NUSRAT, J.-Leave to appeal in this petition is sought from the judgment of the Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench; Rawalpindi, dated 2-4-1983, whereby a criminal miscellaneous petition of the petitioner made under section 561-A of the Criminal Procedure Code for the quashment of a case under section 382/161/165 of the Pakistan Penal Code read with sec--petition 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Art, 1947 pending against him in the Court of the Special Judge, Anti- Corruption (Provincial), Rawalpindi, was dismissed.
2. The quashment of the proceedings was sought on the ground that the Special Judge, Anti- Corruption had no jurisdiction to try the case. However, it is not denied that the petitioner being a teacher of the Government High School is a Government servant. Whether or not he was guilty of the offence under the relevant provisions of law is a question which will be decided on the basis of the evidence by the learned trial Court.
3. It was contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the remarks made in the impugned Judgment are such as are likely to cause prejudice to the petitioner at the trial. The petitioner should have no apprehension in this behalf because of the observations of the learned High Court in the impugned judgment that nothing contained therein shall influence the learned trial Judge in any way, who shall decide the case on merits.
4. The petition has no substance and is dismissed accordingly.