Case Details

Citation(s)
1959 SLG 4427 = 1959 SLD 4427 = 1959 PLD 648
WEST PAKISTAN, KARACHI
Criminal Appeal No. 416 of 1958, decided on 4th August 1959.
Presented By: Illahi Baksh Khamisani and A. S. Faruqui, JJ  
  Tufailali for Appellants.   Haleem A. P. P. for
Respondent.

MUHAMMAD SHAFI and another-Appellants  

VERSUS

  THE STATE-Respondent

Law: Evidence Act (I of 1872)

Section: 56

Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

Section: 378,383,390

(a) Evidence Act (I of 1872),   S. 56-Judicial notice-Taken of fact that a number of anti-smuggling prosecutions had been launched at relevant time.   (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)   Ss. 378, 383 & 390-Theft- Extortiori-Robbery-Distinction.   In all robbery there is either theft or extortion. Theft becomes robbery if the offender voluntarily causes or attempts to cause to any person death or hurt or wrongful restraint or fear of instant death or of instant hurt or of instant wrongful restraint. Extortion becomes robbery if the offender at the time of com mitting the extortion, is in the presence of the person put in fear and commits the extortion by putting that person in fear of instant death or of instant hurt or of instant wrongful restraint to that person.   The chief distinguishing element in robbery is the presence of the fear of imminent violence.   The margin between theft and extortion is sometimes very thin. They often overlap and it sometimes becomes difficult to say where the theft ends and the extortion begins.   A boy, aged about 15 years, was carrying home from his father's shop four gold bars belonging to his father. The gold was apparently a smuggled commodity. On the way, two persons, one a police constable and the other an employee of the shop, came up from behind, riding the same cycle. They stopped the boy, and took him inside a shop which belonged to the husband of the Constable's sister. The Constable then asked the boy to show him the gold and, on the boy's refusal, took the gold out of his pocket, whereupon the boy started crying aloud which attracted a number of persons on the scene. When these persons arrived on the scene and asked the Constable why he was taking the gold belonging to the boy he said that a young boy like him would not be allowed to take so much of gold and that he should bring some elderly person to whom the gold would be returned. But the gold was never returned. Apparently because the gold was smuggled, no report was lodged with the police but the boy's father instituted a complaint against the two offenders about six month's after the incident. They were…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register