Case Details

Citation(s)
2023 SLG 347 2023 SLD 347 2023 YLR 434
Peshawar High Court
Criminal Revision Petition No. 28-P of 2021, decided on 29th July, 2021. Date of hearing: 29th July, 2021.
MUHAMMAD NAEEM ANWAR, J

Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395

RAZA SHAH

VS

SUPERINTENDENT CENTRAL PRISON, PESHAWAR and another

Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

Section: 406,420,489-F

Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Section: 435,439

(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)---Ss. 406, 420 489-F---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), Ss. 435 439---Criminal breach of trust, cheating, dishonestly issuing a cheque---Petitioner had challenged the order of the first appellate court vide which his appeal for conversion of consecutive sentences into concurrent, was dismissed---Validity---Admittedly, for all the offences in four FIRs, separate challan were submitted before the court---Though three out of four cases were pending in one and the same court however, the trials were undeniably separate---Accused had pleaded his guilt, in all the four cases, before the Trial Court after framing of charge---Earlier when charge was framed he denied the allegations against and claimed trial however, in three out of four cases when he admitted the commission of offence he was not served with a notice as required under S.243 of Cr.P.C. which was mandatory---Record showed that on the basis of admission, the Trial Court without serving him with show cause notice convicted and sentenced him in all the three cases on the same date and in each case, he was awarded three years simple imprisonment with fine, which was done when the accused/petitioner was produced in custody, solely on the basis of application, when he placed himself at the mercy of Court---Undisputedly, the petitioner had not challenged his conviction before the competent forum---Further, a sentence of three years imprisonment had to commensurate within the offences---Petitioner had been convicted for the offence under S.489-F, P.P.C., for the period of three years in each, however, in case the sentences were not to run concurrently, the petitioner would have to serve a total of 12 years if he paid the fine in each case otherwise petitioner would remain there for further period of four months (SI), such as, further incarceration of the petitioner beyond three years with one month (SI) for failure of payment of fine---Keeping in view the circumstances of the case and the powers of High Court it was the judicial obligation of the Court to undo a wrong in course of administration of justice or to prevent continuation of unnecessary judicial process---Accordingly,…
🔒
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