Confirmation or rescission of a freezing order under Narcotics Law

2009 PCr.LJ 254

Page 257

As is clear from the provision itself, the paramount consideration for the purpose of confirming or rescinding the freezing of the assets will be the existence or otherwise of reasonable grounds for believing the accused guilty of the offence.

2007 PCr LJ 1473

Page 1476

The main grievance of the petitioner was that there is no powers for review in the Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 and once an order has been passed by the Magistrate, he becomes functus officio and was not authorized under the law the same… the principle no doubt is settled but has certain exception. Firstly where such order is not a judgment within the meaning of Section 367 Cr.PC or 369 Cr.PC… Here in the present case interim order passed under Section 516 Cr PC for the custody of property recovered or taken into possession by the police is an order and not judgment….

1999 PCRLJ 1870

Page 1873

I am of the view that dismissal of complaint under section 203, Cr.PC , is a dismissal in limine. The accused had no notice or information about the accusation contained in the complaint. The dismissal of the complaint was not made on merits because genuineness of the allegations or their falsehood had never made subject of appraisal and adjudication by the Court, hence, dismissal of the complaint under Section 203 Cr.PC does not mean the discharge or acquittal of the accused… However  the distinction was drawn between cases in which order of discharged is passed after appreciation of the evidence with a view to determine the innocence or guilt of the accused and those in which the proceedings are terminated merely for some technical reasons, such as absence of the complainant and the dismissal of complaints due to default.

 1986 PLD 294 Lahore

Page 309

In Amiruddin v. the State following the judgment in Gulzar Hussain v. Ghulam Murtaza it was held that the general principle of finality is attached to the decisions or orders of the High Court passed in criminal cases and as such, judgments cannot be altered or reviewed  under section 369 though the said bar is not applicable in order allowing or cancelling bail… It will be noted that the conviction and sentences of Muhammad Khan petitioner were upheld by the High Court and the Supreme Court of Pakistan. Any alteration or modification in the judgments of the trial court will also amount to alteration, review or modification of the judgments of the High Court and the Supreme Court.

1970 PCrLJ 412

An order for dismissal for default of a criminal revision is not a judgment but a mere order and therefore on this ground also section 369 will not bar the inherent  jurisdiction of the High Court to pass an order of restoration, for the ends of justice, in appropriate cases.

Since the first criminal petition filed by the petitioner has not been decided on merits nor on the facts of the case following the aforementioned decision I hold that the matter can be reheard.