Case Details

Citation(s)
2021 SLG 2569 2021 SLD 2569 2021 PCRLJ 1517
Lahore High Court
Criminal Revision No. 128 and Criminal Miscellaneous No. 1-M of 2021, decided on 2nd August, 2021.
MUHAMMAD AMEER BHATTI, CHIEF, JUSTICE
Mian Muhammad Arif for Petitioner. Sajjad Hussain Bhatti, D.P.G. and Sub-Inspector (Mazhar) for the State.

MUHAMMAD RIAZ

VS

THE STATE AND OTHERS

Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Section: 497,426,435

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----Ss. 497, 439, 426 435---Revision---Enhancement of sentence---Suspension of sentence where length of sentence fell within parameters of a short sentence---Bail pending appeal, grant of---Scope---Accused impugned order made under S. 439, Cr.P.C. whereby his sentence was enhanced from four years to seven years and sought suspension of sentence and release on bail---Contention of accused, inter alia, was that impugned order for enhancement of sentence was made by revisional court under S. 439, Cr.P.C. without issuing notice to accused---Validity---Failure to issue notice to accused meant that order for enhancement of his sentence could not be sustained and same was a glaring illegality which was floating on surface of impugned order---Sentence of accused fell within parameters of short sentence and therefore such sentence of accused was suspended and accused was ordered to be released on bail subject to furnishing of surety---Revision was allowed, accordingly. Abdul Hameed v. Muhammad Abdullah and others 1999 SCMR 2589; Mahmood Iqbal v. The State 2008 MLD 1376; Rizwan and another v. Federation of Pakistan through Secretary Ministry and 2 others 2013 YLR 520 and Ilyas alias Billu v. The State 2008 MLD 312 rel. ORDER Criminal Miscellaneous No. 1-M of 2021 MUHAMMAD AMEER BHATTI, C.J. Muhammad Riaz through the instant petition has sought suspension of his sentence and admitting him to bail pending disposal of the above-mentioned appeal. 2. The learned trial Court awarded 04-years sentence, which was challenged through appeal and the complainant side also filed revision petition for enhancement of aforesaid sentence, however, the learned appellate Court while dismissing the appeal of the petitioner accepted the revision petition of the respondent-complainant whereas in the said revision petition no notice was ever issued to the petitioner, as a result whereof his sentence was enhanced upto 07-years. 3. The contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the enhancement of sentence was made by the learned revisional Court without issuing notice to the petitioner. It is noticed that section 439(2), Cr.P.C. makes it…
🔒
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