Case Details

Citation(s)
1996 SLG 4086 1996 SLD 4086 , 1996 PLD 483
Sindh High Court
Criminal Appeal No. 66 of 1993, heard on 22nd September, 1993.
Presented By: Before Akhtar Ali G. Kazi and Haziq-ul-Khairi, JJ
Zia Ahmed Awan and Javed Haider Kazmi for Appellant. Sarwar Khan, A. A. -G. for the State.

MUHAMMAD --- Appellant

VERSUS

THE STATE --- Respondent

Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Section: 242 , 265

Law: Explosive Substances Act, 1908

Section: 5 , 17

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)... ----Ss. 242 & 265-D ...... Framing of charge--Meaning --- Framing of charge means commencement of the, trial of accused. AIR 1943 Nag. 36 ref. Explosive Substances Act (XI of 1908)-- --Ss. 5 & 17 --- Sanction for prosecution of accused accorded by Government after commencement of trial --- Proceedings illegal --- Charge against accused was framed on 1-7-1992 and his plea was recorded on the same date whereas consent 'of the Government to try the accused under S.5/6 of the Explosive Substances Art, 1908 was given under S.7 of the said Act on 25-7-1992 --- Trial of accused having commenced prior to obtaining the Government's sanction for his prosecution,, proceedings taken by Trial Court were illegal---Conviction and sentence of accused were consequently set aside and the case was remanded to Trial Court for his retrial on the basis of evidence produced by the prosecution after framing proper charge. --(Sanction for prosecution], AIR 1943 Nag. 36 ref. Zia Ahmed Awan and Javed Haider Kazmi for Appellant. Sarwar Khan, A. A. -G. for the State. Date of hearing: 22nd September, 1993. ORDER AKHTAR ALI G. KAZI, J.---Appellant Muhammad son of Shah All Panhwar resident of Taluka and District Mirpurkhas has been convicted by Special Court Suppression of Terrorist Activities, Hyderabad. He has been sentenced to undergo R.1 for six years for offence under section 5 of the 'Explosive Substances Act vide his judgment dated 10-1-1993. The appellant being dissatisfied with the abovesaid judgment and order of sentence has filed this appeal before this Court.   The prosecution case as stated by the complainant Manghi Khan, S.H.0, Taluka Police Station, Mirpurkhas as stated by him is that on 24-4-1992 he had received a message from S.P. Mirpurkhas that,a gang of Gul Hassan Panhwar dacoit was present near Dargah of Haji Pur and that he was sending other police force to him for conducting raid on the gang. Accordingly S.H.O. Town Police Station, Muhammad Qasim Ghori, Inspector Sher Khan, Muhammad Siddik Bhatti S.H.O., Mirpurkhas, Jaro Khan S.I.T.E. Police Station alongwith subordinate staff assembled at Taluka Police…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register