Pakistan Case Law
2001 YLR 1360

ABDUL RAQEEB vs THE STATE and 2 others

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation2001 YLR 1360
CourtLahore High Court
Case No.Criminal Miscellaneous No, 63/Q of 2001
Date2001-05-03
Judge(s)Khawaja Muhammad Sharif
ResultPetition accepted
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

This matter arises from a petition challenging an order passed by the lower appellate court regarding an acquittal. The core legal question is whether a revision petition is maintainable before the Sessions Judge against an order of acquittal when an appeal is provided under the law. The Lahore High Court held that under subsection (5) of section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, where an appeal lies and no appeal is brought, no proceedings by way of revision shall be entertained at the instance of the party who could have appealed. Consequently, the court accepted the petition, set aside the impugned order of the lower appellate court, and established the principle that revision proceedings are barred when an appellate remedy was available to the aggrieved party.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Whether a revision petition is maintainable when an appeal is provided under the law and no appeal is brought?
  • Does subsection (5) of section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure bar revision proceedings at the instance of a party who could have appealed?
Laws & provisions referred
  • Section 249-A, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
  • Section 439, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
acquittalrevision petitioncompetency of revisionappellate remedycriminal procedure

ORDER

' In continuation of my order, dated 10-4-2001, learned counsel for the respondents has relied upon 1997 PCr.LJ 1626. He submits that the petitioner was acquitted under section 249-A, Cr.P.C. And no appeal lies before this Court. He further submits that the learned lower appellate Court was right in setting aside the order of the learned Magistrate.

2. On the other hand learned Additional A.G. Submits that only an appeal was competent before this Court and revision petition which was filed by the respondents before the learned Sessions Judge was not maintainable.

3. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties. I very respectfully disagree with the judgment cited by the learned counsel for the respondent. I would like to refer subsection (5) of section 439, Cr.P.C. Which is -eproduced below:-- "Where under code an appeal lies and no appeal is brought, no proceedings by way of revision shall be entertained at the instance of the party who could have appealed."

' A bare perusal of this section would show that when an appeal is provided under the law then no revision is competent. In this view of the matter, this petition is accepted and the impugned order of the learned lower appellant Court is set aside. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.

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