Case Details

Citation(s)
1975 SLG 272 1975 SLD 272 1975 SCMR 346
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Petitions for Special Leave to Appeal Nos. K-24 and K-25 of 1975, decision dated: 3rd June 1975
MUHAMMAD YAQUB ALI AND MUHAMMAD GUL, JJ
Muhammad Suleman, Additional Advocate General Sind instructed by M. L Memon, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner in P. S. L. A.Nos. K24 and K25 of 1975. Muhammad Hayat Junejo, Advocate Supreme Court for
Respondent in P. S. L. A. No. K25 of 1975. Nemo for Re

P. S. L. A. No. K-24 of 1975 THE STATE

VS

Mirza JAWAD BEG P. S. L. A. No. K-25 of 1975 THE STATE vs Qazi PERVEZ IQBAL

Law:

Section:

Suppression of Terrorist Activities (Special Courts) Act (XV of 1975) S. 7 read with Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 426 and Constitution of Pakistan (10,731. Art. 185Se~Aence, suspension of High Court taking view that section 7 of Act XV of 1975 did not Court as prohibit suspension of operation of sentence by High envisaged under S. 426, Cr. P. C. but not passing any operative orderImpugned order passed on matter collaterally arising­ Prayer for suspension of sentence yet to be decided and possibility existing of High Court's refusal to suspend operation of sentence ­Petitions for leave to appeal, in circumstances, held, futile and lave to appeal likely to produce deleterious effect, encouraging piecemeal decisions resulting in multiplicity of proceedings and waste of public time and money. Sind Employees' Social Security Institution and another v. Adamjee Cotton Mills P L D 1975 S C 32 considered. JUDGMENT MUHAMMAD GUL, J. These two petitions by the State raise common question of law as to the interpretation of section 7 and certain other provisions of the Suppression of Terrorist Activities (Special Courts) Act, 1975 (Act XV of !975) sod cats conveniently, be disposed of together. The -Respondent in each cage has been tried under the said Act by the Special Judge, and convicted for one or more of "the scheduled offences", and sentenced to R. 1. varying from five to seven years as the case may be, besides the sentences of fine. Each -Respondent filed an appeal in the High Court of Sind Baluchistan under section 7 of the Act, which has been admitted for regular hearing. Alongwith their appeals, the two -Respondents also applied for the suspension of their sentences during the pendency of the appeals in the High Court. Before the -Respondents' applications for the suspension of their respective sentences could be determined on merits, the State raised a preliminary objection that the High Court, having regard to the special provisions in section 7 and elsewhere in the Act, was not competent to suspend the sentence. A Division Bench of the High Court has, however, ride order dated 1351975 taken the view that upon its proper interpretation, section 7 of…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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