livelawpk.com - The Conviction u/s 174 PPC Invalid due to Non-Compliance ---

The Conviction u/s 174 PPC Invalid due to Non-Compliance with Section 195 Cr.P.C., which mandates a Written Complaint for such Offenses --- Lahore High Court Quashes Conviction

2 months, 1 week
143

The Conviction u/s 174 PPC Invalid due to Non-Compliance with Section 195 Cr.P.C., which mandates a Written Complaint for such Offenses --- Lahore High Court Quashes Conviction

Islamabad 22-01-2025: The Lahore High Court (LHC) has set aside the conviction of a Station House Officer (SHO), Asif Atta, who was sentenced to seven days’ imprisonment by an Additional Sessions Judge for failing to produce an accused in Court. The Appellate Court ruled that the conviction under Section 174 of the Pakistan Penal Code (PPC) was procedurally flawed and violated statutory requirements under the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.).

The conviction arose during proceedings for the cancellation of pre-arrest bail of Muhammad Irfan, an accused in a case registered under Section 489-F PPC for dishonored cheques. The SHO failed to comply with repeated Court directions to produce the accused, leading to a show cause notice and eventual conviction under Section 174 PPC.

The Appellant’s counsel contended that the Additional Sessions Judge lacked the authority to directly convict the SHO without following the mandatory procedure prescribed under Section 195 Cr.P.C.. It was argued that such offenses require a formal complaint by the concerned public servant to a magistrate for trial. The counsel relied on the precedent set in “S.M. Rehmatullah Vs. The State” (PLD 1986 Karachi 560), which emphasizes strict adherence to procedural requirements.

Mr. Justice Muhammad Amjad Rafiq, delivering the judgment, made the following key observations:

Under Section 195(1)(a) Cr.P.C., Courts cannot take cognizance of offenses under Sections 172-188 PPC without a written complaint by the concerned public servant.
The Court noted that the trial judge incorrectly invoked Section 485 Cr.P.C., which pertains to the refusal of witnesses to answer questions or produce documents, whereas the present case fell under Section 174 PPC.
The judgment highlighted Section 487 Cr.P.C., which prohibits judges and magistrates, except those in the Lahore High Court, from trying offenses committed before themselves.

The Lahore High Court quashed the conviction, declaring it legally invalid due to the failure to follow the prescribed procedure. However, the Court permitted the initiation of fresh proceedings, should the trial judge choose to pursue the matter lawfully.