| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1986 SLG 1078 1986 SLD 1078 1986 PLD 42 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Appeal No. 27 (S) of 1985, decision dated: 15-09-1985. (On appeal from the judgment of the Federal Shariat Court dated 18-03-1985 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 227/L of 1984).
JUSTICE MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, CHAIRMAN, JUSTICES NASIM HASAN SHAH AND MUHAMMAD TAQI USMANI, MEMBERS
Muhammad Zainul Abidin, Advocate Supreme Court and Ch. Muhammad Aslam, Advocate-on-Record (absent) for Appellant. Mirza Saeed Beg, Advocate Supreme Court.
Criminal Appeal No. 27 (S) of 1985, decision dated: 15-09-1985. (On appeal from the judgment of the Federal Shariat Court dated 18-03-1985 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 227/L of 1984).
JUSTICE MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, CHAIRMAN, JUSTICES NASIM HASAN SHAH AND MUHAMMAD TAQI USMANI, MEMBERS
Muhammad Zainul Abidin, Advocate Supreme Court and Ch. Muhammad Aslam, Advocate-on-Record (absent) for Appellant. Mirza Saeed Beg, Advocate Supreme Court.
MUHAMMAD ASHRAF
VS
THE STATE
Law:
Section:
(a) Constitution of Pakistan (1973)------ Art. 203-F-Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order (4 of 1979), Arts. 3 & 4-Supreme Court converted petition for leave to appeal into appeal for consideration of questions whether on day (before amendment enhancing the sentence) when accused committed offences under Arts. 3 & 4 of Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order, 1979, he could be awarded enhanced sentence of rigorous imprisonment of 10 years' R. I. and if that sentence was illegal, whether when imposing the legal sentence he would be entitled to any leniency. (b) Constitution of Pakistan (1973)--- -- Art. 203-F-Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order (4 of 1979), Arts. 3 & 4-Proper sentence-Question of sentence essentially appertained to and discretion of trial Court and had to be scrutinized by First Appellate Court Supreme Court, however, in proper cases of departure from any law and principle, could examine question of sentence, in proper cases. (c) Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order (4 of 1979)---------- ------Arts. 3 & 4-Trial Court under wrong assumption not awarding maximum sentence in accordance with amended law-It would, held, not be fair at appellate stage before Supreme Court to award to appellant maximum sentence under the law as it originally stood. Muhammad Zainul Abidin, Advocate Supreme Court and Ch. Muhammad Aslam, Advocate-on-Record (absent) for Appellant. Mirza Saeed Beg, Advocate Supreme Court for Respondent. Dates of hearing : 14th and 15th September, 1985. JUDGMENT JUSTICE MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, CHAIRMAN.-------The petition for leave tot appeal filed by Muhammad Ashraf appellant was converted into an appeal for consideration of the question whether on the day he committed the offences under Articles 3 and 4 of the Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order, i (No. 4 of 1979), whether he could be awarded sentence of rigorous imprison -1 of 10 years' R. I. and if that sentence was illegal whether when imposing the legal sentence he would be entitled to any leniency. The appellant has been found guilty for transporting and keeping in possession a substantial quantity of charas. The learned counsel for the appellant did not…
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