Case Details

Citation(s)
2021 SLG 2596 2021 SLD 2596 2021 PCRLJ 1801
Lahore High Court
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 1498-B of 2020/BWP, decided on 8th July, 2020.
SADIQ MAHMUD KHURRAM, JUSTICE
Muhammad Umair Mohsin for Petitioner. Najeeb Ullah Jatoi, Deputy Prosecutor General with Khalid, SI for the State.

WALEED HASSAN

VS

THE STATE AND ANOTHER

Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Section: 497

Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

Section: 324,334,336,337-A(i),337-F(i),337-L(1),1 48,149

Law: Juvenile Justice System Act, 2018

Section: 4(5)

(a) Interpretation of statutes--- ----Retrospectivity of statute---Scope---If object of an Act, which is to be gathered from the words of the enactment, itself requires that the Act should apply to pending proceedings it should be so applied unless there was a saving clause in the Act itself to the effect that it would not apply to pending proceedings. Interpretation of Statutes by Sir Peter Benson Maxwell; Craies on Statute Law by William Feilden Craies; Duke of Devonshire v. Barrow, etc. ((1877) 2 Q B D 286, 289); Gardner v. Lucas ((1878) 3 A C 582) and Rex v. Southampton Income-tax Commissioners (1916) 2 K B 249 rel. (b) Criminal trial--- ----Procedure---Applicability---Procedure to be followed in trial of an offender must be in accordance with the law of procedure in force on the date of inception of trial and not on the date of commission of offence. (c) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----S. 497---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 324, 334, 336, 337-A(i), 337-F(i), 337-L(1), 148 149---Juvenile Justice System Act (XXII of 2018), S. 4 (5)---Attempt to Qatl-i-amd, Shajjah-i-Khaffifa, Itlaf-i-Salahiyyat-i-Udw, Ghayr-Jaifah Damiyah, other hurts, rioting armed with deadly weapons---Bail, grant of---Juvenile offender---Delay in trial---Determining age of accused---Effect---Only ground raised by accused was that he was a juvenile and there was an unexplained delay in conclusion of his trial---Plea raised by injured witness was that the delay was caused on the part of accused in having himself declared as juvenile offender and if he had not made that application, delay could not have been caused in conclusion of trail---Validity---Making of application for being declared juvenile could not be termed a factor that caused delay in conclusion of trial rendering accused disentitled to bail---Such act or omission was to be pregnant with mala fide on the part of accused/juvenile offender and such factor was not available against accused---Delay in conclusion of trial was neither caused nor occasioned by an act or omission of accused or any person acting on his behalf---Accused was entitled to concession of bail on account of delay in conclusion of trial---Bail was…
🔒
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