| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2014 SLG 2250 2014 SLD 2250 2014 PCRLJ 1640 |
Lahore High Court
Criminal Appeals Nos. 541, 436, 621 and 622 of 2012, heard on 21st June, 2013
SYED MUHAMMAD KAZIM RAZA SHAMSI, J
Shehram Sarwar Ch. for Appellants. Sher Afgan Asadi for Appellants (in Criminal Appeal No. 436 of 2012). Waqar Hassan Mir for Appellants (in Criminal Appeal No. 621 of 2012). Ijaz Feroze for Appellants (in Criminal Appeal No. 622 of 2012). Muhammad Ishaq,
Criminal Appeals Nos. 541, 436, 621 and 622 of 2012, heard on 21st June, 2013
SYED MUHAMMAD KAZIM RAZA SHAMSI, J
Shehram Sarwar Ch. for Appellants. Sher Afgan Asadi for Appellants (in Criminal Appeal No. 436 of 2012). Waqar Hassan Mir for Appellants (in Criminal Appeal No. 621 of 2012). Ijaz Feroze for Appellants (in Criminal Appeal No. 622 of 2012). Muhammad Ishaq,
MUZAMMAL HUSSAIN and another
VS
The STATE
Law:
Section:
Penal Code (XLV of 1860)-------Ss. 409, 420, 468 & 471---Prevention of Corruption Act (II of 1947), S. 5--- Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), Ss. 221, 342, 364 & 537---Criminal breach of trust, cheating, forgery and illegal gratification---Appreciation of evidence---Plea raised by accused was that neither charge was properly framed, nor incriminating evidence was put to them properly in statement under S.342, Cr.P.C. and evidence was also not recorded in accordance with law---Validity---By non-framing of charge, no prejudice was caused to accused but simultaneously it was requirement of law that each and every fact leading to criminal action taken by a person was to be alleged against him with reference to the sections under which that act had become punishable---By not charging accused according to the acts performed by them and covered by penal provisions, grave injustice had been done to accused---Certificate of its inability was mandatory requirement of law, when Trial Court had not recorded evidence itself---Accused were confronted with documentary evidence jointly, which confrontation showed that all documentary evidence available on record was confronted to each of the accused irrespective of the fact whether that document was related to that accused or not---Defects pointed out by accused were in fact procedural irregularities committed by Trial Court in conducting trial which were curable and could be cured---When such conclusion was drawn that the defects were curable irregularities and not illegalities vitiating proceedings, then there was no other option except to remit the case to Trial Court for conducting de novo trial---High Court set aside convictions and sentences awarded to accused persons and case was remanded to Trial Court for trial afresh in accordance with law---Appeal was allowed in circumstances. Mst. Kausar Bibi v. The State 2011 PCr.LJ 1495 distinguished. JUDGMENT SYED MUHAMMAD KAZIM RAZA SHAMSI, J.---Muzammal Hussain, Khalid Mushtaq, Usman Siddique, Muhammad Nasir Makhdoomi alias Nasir Butt, Anjum Majeed, Asghar Ali and Muhammad Aslam, have faced trial in case F.I.R. No.31 dated 4-5-2010, registered under sections 409,…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492