MUHAMMAD SAJID AND ANOTHER Versus THE STATE
ORDER
This is a petition under section 561‑A; Cr.P.C. by Muhammad Sajid and Muhammad Arshad, petitioners., for a direction to the prosecution to proceed only with one case at a time in respect of the three cases that have been filed against them.
2. The prosecution case in brief is that on 22‑7‑1987 at about 10‑45 p. m. the petitioners were apprehended near Chungi Amar Sadhu, Ferozpur Road, Lahore, whilst they were proceeding towards Kasur in a Suzuki Van in which ten maunds and twenty kilos of charas was found. Accordingly, an F.I.R. was registered against them at Police Station Green Town, Lahore, under sections 156(1)8 and 9 of the Customs Act, section 3/4 of the Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order 1979 and section 165‑A , P . P. C . A challan under section 156(1) 8 and 9 of the Customs Act has been filed against the petitioners before the learned Special Judge, Customs, Lahore, a challan under sections 3/4 of the Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order, 1979, has been filed in the Court of Mr. Muhammad Musa Khan, Magistrate Section 30, Lahore, and a challan under section 165‑A, P.P.C. against Muhammad Sajid, petitioner, only has been filed before the learned Special Judge, Anti‑Corruption, Lahore. The petitioners pray that all the three cases should not be tried together, but that they should be taken up one after the other to enable them to properly defend the same.
3. I have heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the petitioners, the Advocate for the Provincial Government and the Advocate appearing for the Customs Department. All the learned counsel are agreed in view of the decision of the Karachi High Court in Muhammad Haroon's case 1980 P Cr. L J 759, which decision has been approved by the Supreme Court in Muhammad Haroon's case 1980 S C M R 725, that the request of the petitioners is reasonable and just and should be allowed. In this view of the matter, the learned counsel requests that this petition may be admitted and disposed of as a notice case.
4. In view of the fact that this case has been argued at length and there is a request for the disposal of this case as a notice case, hereby admit this petition and will dispose it of as a notice case.
5. In view of the decision of the Supreme Court in Muhammad Haroon's case (Supra), I would hereby order the prosecution to proceed with the prosecution of one case at a time at their choice and to stay the proceedings in the other cases, till the decision of the first case which they chose to try, is delivered. In view of Article 29 of the Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order, 1979, which states that the said order shall have effect no" withstanding anything contained in any other law for the time being in force and specially considering the fact that the charas was recovered from the petitioners in the heart of the city and not in the border belt, I would assume that the prosecution would ta4e up the case of the petitioners which they have filed under sections 3/4 of the Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order, 1979, first. I would like to make it clear that I have not quashed any of the three cases which have been registered against the petitioners.
M . Y . H . /M‑477/ L Petition allowed.