Case Details

Citation(s)
2020 SLG 2245 2020 SLD 2245 2020 PLJ 963
Sindh High Court
Spl. Crl. A. No. 42 of 2018, decision & hearing Date : 18.9.2019
SALAHUDDIN PANHWAR, JUSTICE SHAMSUDDIN ABBASI, JUSTICE
Mr. Muhammad Nadeem Khan, Advocate alongwith Mr. Irfan Aziz, Advocate for Appellant. Mr. Hussain Bukhsh Baloch, Addl. P.G. for State.

FAHIM ALI

VS

STATE

Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860

Section: 34,324,353

Law: Anti Terrorism Act, 1997

Section: 6(2)(ee),7(b)

Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973

Section: 13

Law: Explosive Substances Act, 1908

Section: 5

Pakistan Penal Code, 1860 (XLV of 1860)----Ss. 353, 324 & 34--Explosive Substances Act, 1908, S. 5--Anti-Terrorism Act, (XXVII of 1997), Ss. 6(2)(ee) & 7(b)--Constitution of Pakistan, 1973, Art. 13--Allegation of direct firing upon police party--Conviction & sentence--Challenge to--If one is convicted for one offence i.e. 'merely possessing explosive' twice i.e. one under Explosive Substances Act and under Arms Act, it shall seriously prejudice guarantee, provided by Art. 13 of Constitution, therefore, it would always be obligatory upon prosecution by first establish 'object' thereby bringing an act of 'possessing explosive' to be one within meaning of second part of Section 6(2)(ee) of Act in absence whereof punishment u/S. 7(1)(ff) would not be legally justified particularly when accused is convicted independently for such act--Conviction awarded against accused u/S.7(i)(f) is hereby set aside--It was obligatory, upon trial Court to have appreciated attending circumstances too while awarding maximum sentence which prima facie is not done--Appellant has pleaded himself to be first offender which prosecution did not dispute; and also claimed to be only bread earner of family, which includes five sisters--Detention of only bread earner shall compel females to step-out for survival least bread which it result in bringing a slightest spot towards such helpless ladies shall ruin their lives--It would be in interest of justice to reduce sentence awarded to appellant to already undergone--Accordingly, conviction is maintained but sentence is reduced to one already undergone by appellant including fine--Order accordingly. 2018 PCr.LJ 959. ORDER Appellant Fahim Ali has challenged impugned judgment dated 26.01.2018 passed in Special Case No. 470(vii)/2015 arising out of FIR No. 281/2013, under Section 353, 324, 34, PPC read with Sections 3/4 Explosive Substance Act read with Section 7, ATA PS Soldier Bazar, the appellant was convicted for offence under Section 7(b) ATA and sentenced him to suffer R.I. for ten years and to pay fine of Rs. 5000/-in case of default to suffer S.I. for two months more and also under Section 7(n) of ATA and sentenced him to suffer…
🔒
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