Step 1 of 8
Welcome!
Let's learn how to use the search features effectively.
Step 1 of 7
Welcome!
Let's learn how to use the search features effectively.
Search Results: Categories: 492 CrPC (1 found)
MALIK MUDASSAR ALI ETC VS SECRETARY PPD ETC
Citation: 2025 LHC 1154
Case No: W.P No.6630 of 2022
Judgment Date: 28/02/2025
Jurisdiction: Lahore High Court
Judge: Justice Anwaarul Haq Pannun
Summary: (a) Constitution of Pakistan (1973)— Arts. 4, 199 & 212 — Constitutional jurisdiction — Maintainability — Nature of challenge — Disciplinary proceedings against public prosecutors — Scope of writ jurisdiction — Bar of Article 212 — Applicability.Held, where disciplinary action is challenged not on the basis of terms and conditions of service but for being initiated in violation of statutory mandate (Section 10(2) of Punjab Criminal Prosecution Service Act, 2006), constitutional jurisdiction under Article 199 is maintainable — Bar under Article 212 is not attracted where a pure question of law regarding lawful authority of respondents is raised.(b) Punjab Criminal Prosecution Service (Constitution, Functions and Powers) Act, 2006— Ss. 5, 6, 9, 10(1), 10(2), 13, 17 & 18 — Prosecutorial structure and independence — Hierarchical command — Disciplinary authority — Prosecutor General as head of service — Role of Appeal Committees — Scope of recommendations — Validity of proceedings initiated without reference by Prosecutor General.Held, the Prosecutor General is the administrative and functional head of the Prosecution Service with exclusive statutory mandate to issue directions and oversee prosecutorial conduct — All prosecutors are bound to follow Code of Conduct and guidelines issued by the Prosecutor General — No disciplinary proceedings can be initiated against a prosecutor without a reference from the Prosecutor General or District Public Prosecutor under Section 10(2) of the Act — Initiation of proceedings by Secretary, Public Prosecution Department, in absence of such reference, held illegal and ultra vires.(c) Criminal Procedure Code (1898)— Ss. 417, 492–495 — Prosecution — Functions and powers of Public Prosecutors — Role in trial and appeals — Distinction between opinion and final authority to appeal — Legal protection to prosecutorial discretion.Held, opinion formed by prosecutors or appeal committees regarding fitness of case for appeal is advisory and not binding on the Government — Absence of mala fide precludes punitive consequences — Prosecutors’ assessments, when made in accordance with issued guidelines, enjoy statutory protection under Section 18(1) of the 2006 Act.(d) Interpretation of Statutes— Delegation of powers — Statutory compliance — Mandatory procedural requirement — Non-compliance — Effect.Held, Section 10(2) of the 2006 Act vests exclusive authority in Prosecutor General or District Public Prosecutor to initiate reference for disciplinary proceedings — Any action taken in contravention is void and without legal effect — Procedural safeguards prescribed in statute cannot be bypassed or substituted.(e) Administrative Law— Ultra vires — Absence of lawful authority — Quashment of disciplinary proceedings.Held, orders passed by Secretary Public Prosecution and inquiry report prepared without statutory authority or proper reference held to be ultra vires, illegal, and void ab initio — Entire proceedings quashed.Disposition:Writ petition allowed.Impugned disciplinary proceedings declared to have been initiated without lawful authority.Orders dated 16.07.2021, 07.10.2021, and 05.04.2022 set aside and quashed.