| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1985 SLG 940 1985 SLD 940 1985 SCMR 1771 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Petitions for Special Leave to Appeal Nos. 34-R(S) 39-R(S) of 1985, decision dated: 17-06-1985
MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, CHAIRMAN, NASIM HASAN SHAH, SHAFIUR RAHMAN AND MUHAMMAD TAQI USMANI, MEMBERS
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Criminal Petitions for Special Leave to Appeal Nos. 34-R(S) 39-R(S) of 1985, decision dated: 17-06-1985
MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, CHAIRMAN, NASIM HASAN SHAH, SHAFIUR RAHMAN AND MUHAMMAD TAQI USMANI, MEMBERS
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
MUHAMMAD IQBAL and anothers
VS
. THE STATE--Respondent
Law:
Section:
Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order (4 of 1979)-----Art. 4--Award of sentence of five years--Punishment provided by Art. 4, Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order, 1979, being "imprisonment for life" or "imprisonment which was not less than two years" means that imprisonment cannot be less than two years but can be more than 2 years--There is also limit on maximum which could not be more than imprisonment for life which would mean rigorous imprisonment for 25 years--Award of sentence of 5 years therefore, was lawful.--[Sentence]. Javed Shaikh v. The State 1985 SCMR 153 mentioned. Muhammad Munir Peracha, Advocate Supreme Court and Ch. Akhtar Ali, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners (in both Criminal Petitions). Nemo for the State (in both Criminal Petitions). Date of hearing: 21st May, 1985. ORDER MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH (CHAIRMAN).-- Same question of law has been raised in these two petitions. They are, therefore, being disposed of together. Leave to appeal has been sought from two separate judgments of the Federal Shariat Court, dated 20th February, 1985; whereby the conviction of and various sentences awarded to, the two petitioners, for the offence under Article 4 of the Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order,' 1979, were affirmed. One of the sentences awarded to the petitioners is 5 years' R.I. each. Learned counsel for the petitioners has in the very outset stated that the question of merits regarding finding of guilty having been concluded by concurrent findings of fact by the two learned Courts below, the same are not challenged in these petitions. The only question raised by him is regarding the legality of the sentence of 5 years' imprisonment awarded to each one of the petitioners. The precise contention raised by the learned counsel in this behalf is that Article 4 provides for either of the two sentences namely, imprisonment for life or imprisonment for two years, therefore, a sentence of 5 years was not permissible in law. He further explained that Chapter III of Pakistan Penal Code including sections 53, 55 and 57 did not specify the period of imprisonment for life. However, regardless of the period a…
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