| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2019 SLG 1583 2019 SLD 1583 2019 PCRLJ 1064 |
Sindh High Court
Special Criminal Anti-Terrorism Jail Appeals Nos. 173, 174 and Confirmation Case No. 2 of 2015, decision Dated: 31-10-2018. Hearing Dated: 22-10-2018.
NAIMATULLAH PHULPOTO, JUSTICE MOHAMMED KARIM KHAN AGHA, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Amjad Hussain
Respondent(s) by: Muhammad Iqbal Awan, Deputy Prosecutor-General Sindh
Special Criminal Anti-Terrorism Jail Appeals Nos. 173, 174 and Confirmation Case No. 2 of 2015, decision Dated: 31-10-2018. Hearing Dated: 22-10-2018.
NAIMATULLAH PHULPOTO, JUSTICE MOHAMMED KARIM KHAN AGHA, JUSTICE
Petitioner(s) by: Amjad Hussain
Respondent(s) by: Muhammad Iqbal Awan, Deputy Prosecutor-General Sindh
MUHAMMAD NAWAZ AND OTHERS
VS
THE STATE
Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
Section: 154,174,225,342,367,367(2)(3),374,537,54 4A
Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860
Section: 34,302,324,353,393,400
Law: Sindh Arms Act, 2013
Section: 23(1)(a)
Law: Anti Terrorism Act, 1997
Section: 7,7(1)(a)
(a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----Ss. 367 & 225---Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997), S. 7---Penal Code (V of 1860), S. 302---Act of terrorism---Qatl-i-amd---Contents of ---Scope---One sentence for two separate offences---Charge, framing of---Error---Effect---Trial Court awarded one death penalty for two separate offences under S. 7 of Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 and S. 302, P.P.C.---Validity---Held, Trial Court should have given separate conviction and sentence in respect of each offence charged---One death penalty had been awarded for offences under S. 7 of Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 and S. 302, P.P.C. and as such was a defect in the and violation of S. 367, Cr.P.C.---Separate charge for each offence had also not been framed as required by law, however, since failure to do so based on the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case did not cause any prejudice to the appellant, therefore, case was not remanded to Trial Court for reframing of the charge and re-recording of evidence---High Court set aside the and directed the Trial Court to write a fresh ---Appeal was disposed of accordingly. Irfan v. Mohammad Yousuf 2016 SCMR 1190 ref. Mohammed Mumtaz Qadri v. The State PLD 2016 SC 17 rel. (b) Judgment--- ----Appellate Court, duty of---Court is to ensure that s are handed down strictly in accordance with law---If any legal errors are found then they are not to be ignored if they cause prejudice to either party and if such errors are curable then appropriate steps are taken to rectify the same. (c) Administration of justice--- ----Duty of judge is to decide case in accordance with the oath of office in accordance with the law of the land. Mohammed Mumtaz Qadri v. The State PLD 2016 SC 17 rel. THIS JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY: MOHAMMED KARIM KHAN AGHA, J.--- Appellant Mohammad Nawaz son of Mohammad Zareen has preferred these appeals against the impugned judgment dated 03.07.2015 passed by the learned Special Judge Anti-Terrorism Court No.V, Karachi in Special Case No.A-114/ 2014, FIR No.101/2014 under sections 302, 324, 353, 393, 427, P.P.C. read with section 7 of ATA, 1997, registered at police station Sharafi Goth and Special Case No.A-115/2014, FIR…
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