| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2020 SLG 1135 2020 SLD 1135 2020 PCRLJ 952 |
Peshawar High Court
Criminal Appeal No. 1016-P of 2019, decided on 23rd October, 2019.
QAISAR RASHID KHAN, JUSTICE AHMAD ALI, JUSTICE
Muhammad Saleem Mardan for Appellant. Syed Sikandar Hayat Shah, AAG for the State.
Criminal Appeal No. 1016-P of 2019, decided on 23rd October, 2019.
QAISAR RASHID KHAN, JUSTICE AHMAD ALI, JUSTICE
Muhammad Saleem Mardan for Appellant. Syed Sikandar Hayat Shah, AAG for the State.
NASAR SHAH
VS
THE STATE
Law:
Section:
(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----Ss. 148, 149, 324, 353 & 34---Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997), S. 7---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 367---Rioting, armed with deadly weapon, common object, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, assault or criminal force to deter public servant from discharge of his duty, common intention, act of terrorism---Appreciation of evidence---Language and contents of ---Scope---Prosecution case mainly hinged upon Ss. 148 & 149, P.P.C. on the score that the accused being the members of unlawful assembly in prosecution of the common object of that assembly, being armed with firearms, rioted the police party and as a result thereof two police personnel got injured which established aggression of the accused party and therefore Ss. 148 & 149, P.P.C. were added---Firing at the police party, as per prosecution episode, was made by five number of persons of whom the accused was arrested on the spot---Trial Court had left Ss. 148 & 149, P.P.C. unattended but found that accused could only be awarded sentence under Ss. 324/34, 353/34, P.P.C. and Ss. 7(c), 7(h) of Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 when Ss. 148 & 149, P.P.C. were proved---Trial Court although had specifically mentioned that the prosecution had proved its charges against the accused except S. 302, P.P.C. which meant that Ss. 148 & 149, P.P.C. were also proved but no finding with regard to Ss. 148 & 149, P.P.C. were given---Mandate of subsections (2) and (3) of S. 367, Cr.P.C. required that where the court found the accused guilty of one or more offences, then separate sentence must be explicitly awarded at the time of recording conviction---Accused person could not be presumed or implied to be convicted under Ss. 148 & 149, P.P.C.---High Court, without going into the merits of the case, remanded the case to the trial court for re-writing the ---Appeal was allowed. (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----Ss. 367 & 537---Language and contents of ---Finding or sentence when reversible by reason of error or omission in charge or other proceedings---Specific sentence to be passed---Scope---Law provides for passing of specific sentence for a…
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