Jurisdiction between two districts decided by Lahore High Court .
### فیصلے کی مرکزی کہانی
**پس منظر:**
ریاست علی کو پاکستان پینل کوڈ (PPC) کی دفعہ 462-J کے تحت ایف آئی اے سرکل، گجرات میں ایف آئی آر نمبر 145/2024 میں بجلی چوری سے متعلق ایک جرم کے تحت گرفتار کیا گیا تھا۔ اس نے گجرات کی سیشن عدالت میں بعد از گرفتاری ضمانت کے لیے درخواست دائر کی جسے علاقائی دائرہ اختیار نہ ہونے کی وجہ سے خارج کر دیا گیا۔ اس کے بعد انہوں نے پھالیہ کی سیشن عدالت میں بھی یہی درخواست دائر کی جسے بھی اسی وجہ سے خارج کر دیا گیا۔
**قانونی مسئلہ:**
درخواست گزار کو اس حوالے سے الجھن کا سامنا کرنا پڑا کہ کس عدالت کے پاس اس کی ضمانت کی درخواست سننے اور مقدمہ چلانے کا علاقائی دائرہ اختیار ہے۔
**عدالت کا فیصلہ:**
لاہور ہائی کورٹ نے دائرہ اختیار کا مسئلہ واضح کر دیا:
1. ** دائرہ اختیار کا تعین:**
- FIA اپنے شیڈول میں درج جرائم کی تفتیش کے لیے ذمہ دار ہے لیکن اس کے پاس ٹرائل کے لیے خصوصی عدالتیں نہیں ہیں۔
- ایف آئی اے کے شیڈول میں شامل جرائم کا ٹرائل، بلکہ پی پی سی جیسے دیگر قوانین کے تحت، متعلقہ والدین کے قوانین کے تحت نامزد عدالتوں کے ذریعے چلایا جانا چاہیے۔
2. **قابل اطلاق قانون:**
- بجلی کی چوری سے متعلق سیکشن 462-J PPC کے تحت جرائم، سیشن کورٹ جسے الیکٹرسٹی یوٹیلٹیز کورٹ کے طور پر نامزد کیا گیا ہے، سیکشن 462-G (a) PPC اور متعلقہ نوٹیفکیشن کے مطابق چلایا جائے گا۔
3. **علاقائی دائرہ اختیار:**
- کریمنل پروسیجر کوڈ (Cr.P.C.) کی دفعہ 177 کے مطابق، وہ جگہ جہاں جرم ہوا ہے مقدمے کی سماعت اور ضمانت کی سماعت کے لیے علاقائی دائرہ اختیار کا تعین کرتا ہے۔
- چونکہ یہ جرم پاہڑیانوالی، تحصیل پھالیہ، ضلع منڈی بہاؤالدین میں ہوا، ایڈیشنل سیشن جج-I، پھالیہ، جسے الیکٹریسٹی یوٹیلیٹیز کورٹ کے طور پر نامزد کیا گیا ہے، کا دائرہ اختیار ہے۔
**نتیجہ:**
لاہور ہائی کورٹ نے ہدایت کی کہ ایڈیشنل سیشن جج ون پھالیہ جرم کا نوٹس لیں، ٹرائل کریں اور ریاست علی کی درخواست ضمانت کی سماعت کریں۔ یہ فیصلہ اس بات کو یقینی بناتا ہے کہ مقدمے کی سماعت اور ضمانت کی کارروائی عدالت کے ذریعے درست علاقائی دائرہ اختیار میں کی جائے۔
**مضمرات:**
یہ فیصلہ ایف آئی اے کے زیر تفتیش مقدمات کے لیے دائرہ اختیار کی حدود کو واضح کرتا ہے لیکن خاص طور پر ایف آئی اے ایکٹ کے تحت خصوصی عدالت کو تفویض نہیں کیا گیا ہے۔ یہ اس بات کی تصدیق کرتا ہے کہ اس طرح کے مقدمات جرم کے بنیادی قانون کے تحت نامزد عدالتوں کی طرف سے چلائے جائیں، جرم کی نوعیت اور اس مقام دونوں کو مدنظر رکھتے ہوئے جہاں یہ ہوا ہے۔
The unique point decided in the judgment is the clarification of jurisdiction regarding the trial and bail proceedings for offences investigated by the Federal Investigation Agency (FIA) but not specifically assigned to a special court under the Federal Investigation Agency Act, 1974. The court determined that despite the involvement of the FIA, the competent court for trial and bail of offences listed in the schedule of the FIA Act will be the regular courts designated under the parent statute of the offence. Specifically, for offences under Section 462-J of the Pakistan Penal Code, related to electricity theft, the competent court is the Sessions Court designated as the Electricity Utilities Court, in the territorial jurisdiction where the offence occurred.
فیصلے میں جو منفرد نکتہ طے کیا گیا وہ وفاقی تحقیقاتی ایجنسی (ایف آئی اے) کے زیر تفتیش جرائم کے مقدمے اور ضمانت کی کارروائی سے متعلق دائرہ اختیار کی وضاحت ہے لیکن فیڈرل انویسٹی گیشن ایجنسی ایکٹ 1974 کے تحت خصوصی عدالت کو تفویض نہیں کیا گیا ہے۔ عدالت نے فیصلہ کیا کہ ایف آئی اے کی شمولیت کے باوجود، ایف آئی اے ایکٹ کے شیڈول میں درج جرائم کے ٹرائل اور ضمانت کے لیے مجاز عدالت جرم کے بنیادی قانون کے تحت نامزد باقاعدہ عدالتیں ہوں گی۔ خاص طور پر، پاکستان پینل کوڈ کے سیکشن 462-J کے تحت بجلی کی چوری سے متعلق جرائم کے لیے، مجاز عدالت سیشن کورٹ ہے جسے الیکٹرسٹی یوٹیلٹی کورٹ کے طور پر نامزد کیا گیا ہے، اس علاقائی دائرہ اختیار میں جہاں جرم ہوا ہے۔
**Lahore High Court, Lahore**
**Judicial Department**
**Case No. Diary No. 68328 dated: 13.05.2024**
**Riasat Ali vs The State, etc.**
**ORDER SHEET**
**Sr. No.**: 02
**Date of order**: 16.05.2024
**Order**:
**Present:**
- Barrister Shahzad Shabbir for the petitioner.
- Sardar Muhammad Ameer Hamza Dogar, Assistant Attorney General for the Federation of Pakistan, assisted by Nadeem Aamir, Deputy Director (Law), Federal Investigation Agency, Lahore.
- Mr. Idrees Rafique Bhatti, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab, along with M/s Nuzhat Bashir and Haroon Rasheed, Deputy Prosecutors General for the State.
**Order:**
The petition involves the determination of jurisdiction between the courts of two districts. Objection by the office is overruled, and the petition is allotted a number for hearing today.
**Writ Petition No. 30611/2024:**
- The petitioner filed for post-arrest bail in F.I.R. No. 145/2024 under Section 462-J PPC at Police Station F.I.A., Circle, Gujrat.
- The Sessions Court, Gujrat, dismissed the application due to territorial jurisdiction (order dated 06.05.2024).
- The application filed at Sessions Court, Phalia, was also returned due to territorial jurisdiction (order dated 07.05.2024).
**Key Arguments:**
- The petitioner’s counsel is uncertain about the competent court for bail and trial.
- Learned Assistant Attorney General and Assistant Advocate General argue that while F.I.A. investigates the scheduled offences, the trial is not specifically assigned to any court by the Federal Investigation Agency Act, 1974.
- The offences in the schedule of the Act are tried by the respective courts as per their parent statute.
**Court's Analysis:**
- F.I.A. is an investigative agency as per the Federal Investigation Agency Act, 1974.
- The offences in the schedule, including Section 462-J PPC, will be tried by courts designated in the parent statute.
- For Section 462-J PPC, the competent court is the Sessions Court designated as Electricity Utilities Court.
**Decision:**
- The competent court to entertain and decide the post-arrest bail application is the Additional Sessions Judge-I, Phalia, being the Electricity Utility Court, within whose territorial jurisdiction the offence occurred.
- This court has the jurisdiction to take cognizance of the offence and conduct the trial.
- The petition is disposed of with instructions to notify all Sessions Judges in Punjab and the Head of F.I.A. in Punjab.
**Judge**: Farooq Haider
**Approved for Reporting**: Farooq Haider
No. HCJD/C-121
ORDER SHEET
IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT, LAHORE
JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
Case No. Diary No.68328 dated: 13.05.2024
Riasat Ali
vs
The State, etc.
Sr.
No.
Date of
order
Order with signature of Judge, and that of parties
or counsel, where necessary.
OBJECTION CASE
02) 16.05.2024 Barrister Shahzad Shabbir for the petitioner.
Sardar Muhammad Ameer Hamza Dogar, Assistant Attorney General
for the Federation of Pakistan (on Court’s call) assisted by Nadeem
Aamir, Deputy Director (Law), Federal Investigation Agency,
Lahore.
Mr. Idrees Rafique Bhatti, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab along
with M/s Nuzhat Bashir and Haroon Rasheed, Deputy Prosecutors
General for the State (on Court’s call).
Since question of deciding jurisdiction with respect to taking
cognizance and conducting trial of the case between the Courts of two districts is
involved in the under-objection petition therefore objection raised by the office is
overruled. Office is directed to allot number to this petition and fix the same for
hearing today while issuing cause list in this regard.
Writ Petition No.30611/2024
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that case arising out of
F.I.R. No.145/2024 was registered against the petitioner under Section: 462-J PPC
at Police Station: F.I.A., Circle, Gujrat; application for petition for post arrest bail
was filed by the petitioner in the case before Sessions Courts, Gujrat, which was
entrusted to the Court of learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Gujrat and was dismissed
as withdrawn due to territorial jurisdiction vide order dated: 06.05.2024 passed by
learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gujrat (copy of said application and order are
available at Pages No.5 to 8 of instant petition); relevant portion of the order is
hereby reproduced as under: -
“In view of above recorded statement of Qasim Ali Advocate
learned counsel for the petitioner/accused Reyasat Ali in case FIR
No.145/2024, offence u/s 462-J, P.S FIA Gujrat, it is noted that
the offence of this case had occurred in the territorial jurisdiction
of district M.B.Din, so this court has no jurisdiction to entertain
instant post-arrest bail petition and petitioner is allowed to file
the same before the court of competent jurisdiction. Consequently,
this post-arrest bail petition is dismissed as withdrawn.”
Then petitioner filed application for post arrest bail in the case in the Court of
learned Additional Sessions Judge, Phalia, which was ordered to be returned due to
territorial jurisdiction vide order dated: 07.05.2024 passed by learned Addl.
Diary No.68328 dated: 13.05.2024
Writ Petition No.30611/2024
2
Sessions Judge, Phalia (copy of said application and order are available at Pages
No.9 to 11 of instant petition) and relevant portion of the order is hereby
reproduced below: -
“5. It is an admitted fact that this FIR has been registered at
Police Station FIA, Circle Gujrat by the concerned officer of the
FIA authority. The Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Phalia has
not been vested with any power to deal with the cases registered
at Police Station FIA and is only entertaining and hearing the
cases registered at local Police Station. As stated by learned
counsel, the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gujrat
was previously dealing with the cases registered at Police Station
FIA. Because of bar of territorial jurisdiction relating to cases
registered at Police Station FIA, this Court has no jurisdiction to
entertain the post arrest bail application. The same may,
therefore, be returned to the learned counsel for petitioner, so
that the same may be presented before the Court of competent
jurisdiction.”
Learned counsel further adds that in aforementioned circumstances, petitioner is
unable to find out the Court having territorial jurisdiction to entertain and decide
the petition for bail, hence, instant petition has been filed before this Court.
2.
Points raised need consideration.
3.
Notice to the State/respondent No.1.
4.
Learned Assistant Attorney General assisted by Deputy Director
(Law), F.I.A., Lahore as well as learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab and
learned Deputy Prosecutors General (present in Court) have accepted the notice on
behalf of the State and expressed their willingness to argue this petition today;
therefore, instant petition is being decided as “Notice Case”.
5.
Brief however necessary facts for deciding instant petition are that
case vide F.I.R. No.145/2024 dated: 02.05.2024 was registered against present
petitioner under Section: 462-J PPC at Police Station: F.I.A., Circle: Gujrat (copy
of F.I.R. is available at Page No.4 of instant petition) and place of occurrence in
Column No.4 of said F.I.R. has been mentioned as “Pahrianwali, Mandi
Bahauddin” (بہاوادین منڈی ،پاہڑیانوالی); petitioner filed application for post arrest bail
in the case in Sessions Courts, Gujrat, which was entrusted to the Court of learned
Additional Sessions Judge, Gujrat however same was dismissed as withdrawn from
said Court due to lack of territorial jurisdiction in order to file application for bail
before the Court of competent jurisdiction (as detailed above); then, petitioner filed
application for post arrest bail before the Court of learned Additional Sessions
Judge, Phalia, which was also ordered to be returned to the petitioner due to bar of
territorial jurisdiction vide order dated: 07.05.2024 passed by learned Additional
Sessions Judge, Phalia (as mentioned above); hence, instant petition has been filed
before this Court.
Diary No.68328 dated: 13.05.2024
Writ Petition No.30611/2024
3
6.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in aforementioned
state of affairs, petitioner is not certain about the Court which has territorial
jurisdiction to entertain the application for bail as well as to take cognizance of the
offence and conduct trial of the case. Learned counsel finally prays for declaring
the relevant Court in this regard.
7.
Learned Assistant Attorney General assisted by Deputy Director
(Law), F.I.A., Lahore submits that Police Station: F.I.A., Circle: Gujrat has
territorial jurisdiction with respect to registration of cases, investigation of cases as
well as inquiring into the offences mentioned in schedule of the Federal
Investigation Agency Act, 1974, in District: Gujrat as well as in the area of District:
Mandi Bahauddin (copy of notification reflecting said jurisdiction has been
produced by him, which has been placed on the record); further adds that Federal
Investigation Agency is only meant for the purpose of investigating scheduled
offences as well as inquiring into the same and the Federal Investigation Agency
Act (ibid) does not contain any specific provision about the Court for the purpose
of trial of the case regarding said offences.
8.
Learned Assistant Advocate General, Punjab while supporting
aforementioned arguments advanced by learned Assistant Attorney General adds
that though offences including mentioned in the schedule of the Federal
Investigation Agency Act, 1974 are to be investigated and inquired into by the
Federal Investigating Agency only yet said “Act” has not been legislated for the
purpose of deciding Court for trial.
9.
Learned Deputy Prosecutors General while adopting aforementioned
arguments of learned Law Officers further add that Federal Investigation Agency
Act, 1974 only deals with investigation as well as inquiry regarding the offences
mentioned in the schedule of said act and since any specific provision for trial of
cases falling in schedule offences is not mentioned therein hence merely by way of
inclusion of any offence in the schedule of the “Act” (supra), venue of the trial will
not be effected.
10.
Arguments heard and available record perused.
11.
The Federal Investigation Agency was established by way of the
Federal Investigation Agency Act, 1974 and as per definition contained in Section:
2 (a) of the Act (ibid), “Agency” means the Federal Investigation Agency
constituted under Section: 3, furthermore, as per Section: 3 (1) of the Act (ibid), the
Federal Government may constitute an Agency to be called “the Federal
Investigation Agency” for inquiry into, and investigation of the offences specified
in the Schedule; for ready reference, both aforementioned sections are hereby
reproduced as under: -
Diary No.68328 dated: 13.05.2024
Writ Petition No.30611/2024
4
“2. (a) “Agency” means the Federal Investigation Agency
constituted under section 3;”
“3.
Constitution of the Agency. (1) Notwithstanding anything
contained in any other law for the time being in force, the Federal
Government may constitute an Agency to be called the Federal
Investigation Agency for inquiry into, and investigation of the
offences specified in the Schedule, including an attempt or
conspiracy to commit, and abetment of any such offence.”
Preamble of the “Act” (ibid) is also hereby reproduced: -
“Whereas it is expedient to provide for the constitution of Federal
Investigation Agency for the investigation of certain offences
committed in connection with matters concerning the Federal
Government, and for matters connected therewith;”
Perusal of Section: 3 of the Act (ibid) read with preamble clearly shows that
Federal Investigation Agency has only been established for the purpose of
investigation of and inquiring into the offences specified in the schedule. So, it is
crystal clear that Federal Investigation Agency is only an “Investigating Agency”
and the Federal Investigation Agency Act, 1974 only deals with investigation of
and inquiring into the offences mentioned in the schedule and it is nowhere
mentioned in said act that if any offence has been included in the schedule of said
act, then any special Court will be established under said act for the purpose of
taking cognizance and conducting trial of the case regarding said offence. Perusal
of the schedule of the “Act” reveals that offences mentioned in various penal
statues have been included in the same including from Pakistan Penal Code.
So, when in the Federal Investigation Agency Act, 1974, it has not
been mentioned that the offences included in the schedule will be tried by any
Court established under said Act, then inspite of the inclusion of offence in the
schedule of said Act, for the purpose of jurisdiction with respect to taking
cognizance of the offence and trial of the case regarding said offence, the parent
statute containing said offence will hold the field i.e. the Court established for
taking cognizance and conducting trial of the case regarding said offence provided
in its parent statute will take cognizance of the offence and conduct trial of the case
e.g. offences mentioned in the Emigration Ordinance, 1979 are also included in the
schedule of the Act (ibid) however same are tried by the Special Court established
under Section: 24 of the Emigration Ordinance, 1979, some offences punishable
under the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 are included in the schedule of the “Act” (ibid)
but same are tried by Anti-Terrorism Court and of course the offences mentioned in
Pakistan Penal Code, which have been included in the schedule of the Act (ibid),
will be tried by the Court established under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898.
The offences relating to electricity contained in Chapter XVII-B of
Pakistan Penal Code, 1860 include Section: 462-J PPC also and offences under
Diary No.68328 dated: 13.05.2024
Writ Petition No.30611/2024
5
Sections: 462-H, 462-I, 462-J, 462-K, 462-I and 462-M have been included in the
schedule of the Federal Investigation Agency Act, 1974 vide notification dated: 08th
November, 2016; in this regard, relevant portion of said notification is hereby
scanned below: -
Since as per notification issued by the Government of Pakistan, Ministry of Interior
dated: 15th January, 2009 (copy whereof has been placed on the record), District:
Mandi Bahauddin falls in the territorial jurisdiction of Police Station: F.I.A., SubCircle, Gujrat, therefore, instant case has been rightly registered at Police Station:
F.I.A., Sub-Circle: Gujrat.
Now question does arise that whether the place, where case has been
registered, will decide the jurisdiction for the purpose of trial of the case or it would
be the place of occurrence? Answer of this question is available in Section: 177 of
Cr.P.C., which clearly shows that every offence shall ordinary be inquired in and
tried by a Court within the local limits of whose jurisdiction it was committed; for
ready reference, said section is hereby reproduced as follows: -
“177. Ordinary Place of inquiry and trial. Every offence shall
ordinary be inquired in and tried by a Court within the local limits of
whose jurisdiction it was committed.”
Of course, in this case, place of occurrence is situated at Pahrianwali (ہڑیانوالی پا),
Tehsil: Phalia, District: Mandi Bahauddin, therefore, the Court having territorial
jurisdiction regarding said place will be the competent Court to take cognizance as
well as conduct trial of the case.
Another question is also relevant here that apart from territorial
jurisdiction, which Court is competent to take cognizance and conduct trial of the
case with respect to offences relating to electricity contained in Chapter XVII-B of
Pakistan Penal Code, in this regard, Section: 462-G (a) PPC clearly shows that the
“Court” means the Court of Session designated as Electricity Utilities Court
Diary No.68328 dated: 13.05.2024
Writ Petition No.30611/2024
6
empowered to take cognizance of an offence under this Chapter; for ready
reference, same is hereby reproduced below: -
“462-G
(a) “Court” means the Court of Session designated as
Electricity Utilities Court empowered to take cognizance
of an offence under this Chapter.”
Furthermore, it has been clearly mentioned in Column No.8 of Schedule-II of
Cr.P.C. that said offences are triable by the Court of Session designated as Electricity
Utilities Court and relevant portion from the same is reproduced as under: -
Therefore, the Court of Session designated as Electricity Utilities Court under
Section: 462-G (a) PPC would be competent to take cognizance of the offences and
conduct trial of the cases regarding said offences. It is also relevant to mention here
that this Court vide notification bearing No.325/JOB(I)/VI.F.6 dated: 25.10.2019
has already authorized all the District and Sessions Judges in the Punjab to hear and
dispose of all such cases falling under Section: 462-G (a) of Criminal Law
(Amendments) Act, 2016 with retrospective effect from 01.02.2016 and they have
been further authorized to nominate one or two Additional District and Sessions
Judges for said purpose till the establishment/constitution of regular new Electricity
Utility Courts; relevant portion of said notification is hereby reproduced as under: -
“The Hon'ble Chief Justice and Judges have been pleased to authorize
all the District and Sessions Judges in the Punjab to hear and dispose
of all such cases themselves and also authorize to nominate one or two
Additional District and Sessions Judges, where required in view of the
pendency of cases to hear and dispose of all such cases falling under
Section 462G(a) of Criminal Law (Amendments) Act, 2016 with
retrospective effect from 01.02.2016, till the establishment/constitution
of regular new Electricity Utility Courts.”
And in the light of said notification, District & Sessions Judge, Mandi
Bahauddin has issued order vide Endst. No.1053/XV.B dated: 30.10.2019
while nominating Additional District & Sessions Judge-I, Phalia for aforesaid
purpose, which is hereby reproduced below: -
Diary No.68328 dated: 13.05.2024
Writ Petition No.30611/2024
7
“O R D E R
In compliance of directions of the Hon'ble Lahore High
Court, Lahore, contained in Notification No.325/JOB(I)/VI.F.6,
dated 25.10.2019, in supersession of all previous orders in this
regard, the following Courts working in this District are hereby
nominated to hear and dispose of all such cases falling under
section 462G (a) of Criminal Law (Amendments) Act, 2016, till the
establishment of/constitution of regular new Electricity Utility
Court:-
Cases Pertaining District Headquarter
MANDI BAHAUDDIN.
Sr. No. Name of Judicial Officer
01
Mr. Iftikhar Hussain, Addl: District & Sessions Judge,
Mandi Bahauddin.
Cases Pertaining to Sub-division PHALIA
Sr. No. Name of Judicial Officer
01
Addl: District & Sessions Judge-I, Phalia
Cases Pertaining to Sub-division MALAKWAL
Sr. No. Name of Judicial Officer
01
Addl: District & Sessions Judge-I, Malakwal
2.
It is pertinent to mention here that 03. Courts of Addl:
District & Sessions Judges are working at Headquarter M.B.Din,
with the bifurcation as (1)-Model Criminal Trial Court, (II)-Model
Civil Appellate Court and third one dealing with all the
miscellaneous cases, sessions cases and Gender Base Violence
cases (with heavy pendency). Though the Court of Mr. Iftikhar
Hussain, learned Addl: District & Sessions Judge, M.B. Din is
working as Model Civil Appellate Court but keeping in view the
pendency of cases and having no other option, the said Court is
nominated to hear and dispose of cases falling under section 462G
(a) of Criminal Law (Amendments) Act, 2016- pertaining to
headquarter Mandi Bahauddin.
3.
All the cases related to above said section, pending before
the Courts are withdrawn there from and transferred/entrusted to
the above mentioned nominated Courts according to their
respective sub-divisions, headquarter, forthwith. The Ahlmads of
Transferring Courts are directed to hand over the files to learned
Transferee Courts in bulk. The cause list shall be generated by the
learned Transferee Court.”
Said order was further modified to the extent of Headquarter Mandi Bahauddin
vide order No.62/XVB dated: 10.01.2022 and relevant portion of the same is
reproduced as under: -
“In partial modification of this office order bearing Ends. No.
1759/XV-B dated 15.12.2021 as well as for smooth functioning of
Sessions Courts, Mandi Bahauddin, and in the public interest it is
order that all cases falling under section 462G (a) of Criminal Law
(Amendments) Act, 2016, pertaining to Headquarter Mandi
Bahauddin, till establishment of/constitution of regular new
Electricity Court, shall be dealt with by the court of undersigned
instead of the Court of Mr. Waris Ali, Additional District & Sessions
Judge, Mandi Bahauddin, for the time being till further order.
This order shall apply on pending cases (except part heard cases)
as well as fresh cases.
Diary No.68328 dated: 13.05.2024
Writ Petition No.30611/2024
8
Since place of occurrence in this case falls in the territorial jurisdiction of SubDivision: Phalia, therefore, learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Phalia being
Electricity Utility Court is competent to take cognizance of said offence and conduct
trial of the instant case regarding said offence under Section: 462-G (a) PPC.
It is by now well settled that the Court competent to take cognizance
of the offence and conduct trial of the case, is competent to entertain and decide the
petition for bail as well in said case; therefore, in this case, learned Additional
Sessions Judge-I, Phalia/Electricity Utility Court (as mentioned above) is
competent to entertain petition for bail and decide the same in accordance with law.
It is relevant to mention here that when there will be any doubt
regarding jurisdiction to inquire into or try any offence, then “High Court” under
Section: 185 (1) Cr.P.C. will decide that which Court will inquire into or try the
offence; for ready reference, Section: 185 (1) Cr.P.C. is reproduced below: -
“185. High Court to decide, in case of doubt, district where
inquiry or trial shall take place. (1) Whenever a question arises as
to which of two or more Courts subordinate to the same High Court
ought to inquire into or try any offence, it shall be decided by that
High Court.”
Therefore, while exercising powers vested under Section: 185 (1) of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1898, this Court decides that the Court (if otherwise competent
to take cognizance) in whose territorial jurisdiction, occurrence has been committed
i.e. the place of occurrence is situated, will take cognizance of the offence and
conduct trial of the case and in this case, said Court would be the Court of learned
Additional Sessions Judge-I/Electricity Utility Court, Phalia.
12.
In view of what has been discussed above, instant petition stands
disposed of with the clear observation that learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Phalia
being Electricity Utility Court will take cognizance of the offence, conduct trial of this
case as well as entertain and decide application for bail in the case accordingly.
Registrar of this Court will send copy of this order to all the learned Sessions Judges in
the Punjab as well as to Head of Federal Investigation Agency in the Punjab.
(Farooq Haider)
Judge
APPROVED FOR REPORTING
(Farooq Haide
Comments
Post a Comment