| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1983 SLG 362 1983 SLD 362 1983 PLD 66 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Petition No. 155-R of 1982, decision dated: lst December, 1982.
ASLAM RIAZ HUSSAIN AND MIAN BURHANUDDIN KHAN, JJ
Muhammad Yousaf Sorab, Advocate Supreme Court with S. M. Chaudhry, Advocate Supreme Court. Nemo for the State.
Criminal Petition No. 155-R of 1982, decision dated: lst December, 1982.
ASLAM RIAZ HUSSAIN AND MIAN BURHANUDDIN KHAN, JJ
Muhammad Yousaf Sorab, Advocate Supreme Court with S. M. Chaudhry, Advocate Supreme Court. Nemo for the State.
MUHAMMAD ILYAS
ves
THE STATE
Law:
Section:
Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order (P. O. 4 of 1979)--Art. 11 read with Arts. 6 & 7-Offence of drinking-Whether provision of Art. 11 also intended to punish a person who had already taken an intoxicant and not merely a person actually found in act of drinking-Leave to appeal granted to consider question. State v. Muhammad Tariq P L D 1982 F S C 169 ref. ORDER ASLAM RIAZ HUSSAIN, J.-Muhammad, Ilyas petitioner seeks Leave to Appeal against .the order of the Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench, Rawalpindi, dated 29-9-1982, dismissing his criminal revision. 2. The facts giving rise to the petition are,. briefly, that while on patrol duty Tanvir Ahmad; S. P. Attock (P. W. 11) caught the petitioner- on suspicion of having taken an intoxicant. He brought him to Volice Station, Attoek and handed him over to Mahmud Akhtar, S. H. O. .Police Station City, Attock for necessary action. The S. H. O. got him medically examined and on receiving the doctor's report to the effect that the petitioner was smelling of alcohol, got a case registered against him at Police Station, Hazro. His stomach-wash and urine were taken by Dr. Rashid Hamid (I'. W. 7) and seat for chemical examination. The chemical examiner opined that there was alcohol in the urine and the stomach wash. He was sent up for trial where he took up the plea that he had taken a medicine under the advice of Dr. Faiz Muhammad (P. W. 2) which contained 11 % alcohol. The trial Court, however, relying on the prosecution evidence, convicted him under section 11 of the Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order, 1979 and sentenced him to 2 years' R. I. and 15 stripes. His appeal before the learned Sessions Judge failed. He then filed a revision petition before the High Court which too was dismissed in limine. Hence the present petition. 3. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and gone through the impugned order. It is apparent from the evidence on the record that the petitioner had taken alcohol. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that in view of the plea of defence taken up by the petitioner he could not have been found guilty for the offence in question. We are, however, not persuaded…
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