| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2006 SLG 2736 2006 SLD 2736 2006 SCMR 1506 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Appeal No.221 of 2003, decision dated: 12-08-2004 (On appeal from the judgment/order dated 7-1-2003 passed by High Court of Balochistan Quetta in Criminal Appeal No.91 of 2002)
IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, RANA BHAGWANDAS AND MUHAMMAD NAWAZ ABBASI, JJ
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
Criminal Appeal No.221 of 2003, decision dated: 12-08-2004 (On appeal from the judgment/order dated 7-1-2003 passed by High Court of Balochistan Quetta in Criminal Appeal No.91 of 2002)
IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, RANA BHAGWANDAS AND MUHAMMAD NAWAZ ABBASI, JJ
Deprecated: str_replace(): Passing null to parameter #3 ($subject) of type array|string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 395
ABDUL SHAKOOR
VS
THE STATE
Law:
Section:
(a) Explosive Substances Act (XI of 1908)-------S. 5---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S.382-B---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)---Leave to appeal was granted to accused to examine as to whether benefit of S.382-B, Cr.P.C. had been declined to him by the Trial Court without assigning strong justification. (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----S. 382-B---Explosive Substances Act (XI of 1908), S.5---Refusal of benefit of S.382-B, Cr.P.C. to accused---Validity---Trial Court had declined to extend the benefit of S.382-B, Cr.P.C. to accused for the reason that the explosive material could have been used by him for terrorism and he was not entitled to such benefit---Said reason was based on the consideration by the Trial Court of the nature of the offence being committed by the accused---Trial Court, no doubt, was bound to consider at the time of deciding the question of sentence of entitlement of accused for protection of his pre-sentence period, but while exercising its discretion judiciously it was not bound to extend such facility to him keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case---Even otherwise, Supreme Court in exercise of its appellate jurisdiction had discretion not to interfere in the order of the Trial Court which was based on sound judicial reasons---Relief claimed by the accused of the benefit of S.382-B, Cr.P.C. was consequently declined to him and his appeal was dismissed accordingly. Muhammad Rafiq v. The State 1995 SCMR 1525; Mukhtiar-ud-Din v. The State 1997 SCMR 55; Javed Iqbal v. The State 1998 SCMR 1539 and Ghulam Sarwar v. The State PLD 1984 SC 218 ref. (c) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)--- ----S. 382-B---Period of detention to be considered while awarding sentence of imprisonment---Application and scope---Under S.382-B, Cr.P.C. it is mandatory for the Trial Court to consider at the time of deciding the question of sentence being awarded to an accused as to whether he is entitled for protection of pre-sentence period, but the Court while exercising discretion judiciously is not bound to extend such facility to him keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case. Muhammad Zaman Bhatti, Advocate…
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