Pakistan Case Law
1984 SCMR 58(1)

KHAN BAHADAR vs BARKAT AHMAD AND OTHERS

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation1984 SCMR 58(1)
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Civil Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No, 114 of 1981
Date1983-03-12
Judge(s)Nasim Hasan Shah, Aslam Riaz Hussain
ResultPetition dismissed
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

The petitioner filed a petition for leave to appeal against an order of the High Court dated 10-2-1981, which had dismissed his writ petition challenging a Superdari order passed by an Additional Sessions Judge in a pending criminal matter. The Supreme Court reviewed the impugned judgment and heard the petitioner's Advocate-on-Record. Upon examination, the Court found the petition to be entirely frivolous and lacking in merit. Consequently, the Supreme Court dismissed the petition for leave to appeal, affirming the High Court's decision to uphold the Superdari order. The judgment underscores the principle that petitions lacking substantive legal grounds or merit are subject to summary dismissal by the Court.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Is a petition for leave to appeal against a High Court order dismissing a writ petition maintainable when the underlying petition is found to be frivolous?
  • Can the Supreme Court dismiss a petition for leave to appeal after reviewing the impugned judgment and hearing the petitioner's counsel?
Superdarileave to appealfrivolous petitionwrit petitioncriminal matter

ORDER

1. ' ASLAM RIAZ HUSSAIN, J.-The petitioner seeks leave to appeal against the order of the High Court, dated 10-2-1981, dismissing his writ petition against an order of Superdari passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge in criminal matter pending before him.

2. We have gone through the impugned judgment and heard the learned Advocate-on-Record for the petitioner because the learned counsel has not cared to appear. He has good reason for not appearing because the petition' is on the face of it is a frivolous one and ought not to have been filed. It is consequently dismissed.

For educational and research use only — not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.