Case Details

Citation(s)
1993 SLG 564 1993 SLD 564 1993 SCMR 316
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Cr. P.L.S.A. No.51(S) of 1992, decision dated: 26-08-1992(From the judgment dated 10-5-1992 passed by the Federal Shariat Court)
SALEEM AKHTAR AND MUHAMMAD TAQI USMANI, JJ

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

GULISTAN

THE STATE

Law:

Section:

Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order (4 of 1979)--Art.15---Scope and application of Art.15---Wards "no such order" in the proviso to S.15 refer to the order contemplated to be passed under Art.15(2) and has no reference to the order passed under Art.15(1)---Proviso to Art.15, thus, does not apply to Art.15(1) and its applicability is restricted to Art.15(2) alone. A perusal of Article 15 will show that sub-clause (1) applies to the Court which has been empowered to pass order of confiscation of any thing involved in the case. liable to confiscation irrespective of the acquittal of the person charged with the offence. Sub-clause (2) does not apply to Court. In the circumstances specified therein, the Collector or Prohibition Officer incharge of the District or any officer authorised by the Provincial Government may pass order for confiscation. The proviso imposes preconditions for exercise of power under sub-clause (2). Firstly, in such cases the officer empowered cannot pass order of confiscation before the expiry of 15 days from the date of seizure of the thing liable to be confiscated. Secondly, if any person appears and claims the said thing, then without hearing such person and affording him an opportunity to produce evidence, if any, in support of his claim, no order of confiscation can be passed. The words "no such order" in the proviso refer to the order contemplated to be passed under Article 15 (2). It has no reference to the order passed under Article 15 (1) by the Court. ORDER SALEEM AKHTAR, J.---This is a petition for leave to appeal against the judgment of the Federal Shariat Court. The petitioner submitted revision application praying for release of the truck involved in the offence committed by the accused persons who were convicted and the truck was confiscated. The petitioner claims to be the owner of the truck and was not prosecuted with the driver and cleaner who were charged under Article 3/4, Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order, 1979. Mr. Muhammad Munir Peracha, the learned A.S.C. contended that the petitioner had sold the truck to Karim Dad who sold it to Malik Fayyaz and all transactions were on hire-purchase basis and further that…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

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