Law: Customs Act, 1969

Section: 156(89),185-F

Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

Section: 468,471

Law: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Section: 403

Law: Constitution of Pakistan, 1973

Section: 13(a)

Customs Act (IV of 1969)---.--- ---.---Ss. 156(89) & 185-F---.---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.468 & 471---.---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S.403---.---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.13(a)---.---Possessing smuggled goods, forgery and using forged documents as genuine---.---Double jeopardy---.---Appreciation of evidence---.---Sentence, reduction in---.---Appeal to Special Appellate Tribunal---.---Appellant/accused was convicted and sentenced and vehicle in question having also been confiscated, accused had filed appeal---.---Counsel for accused had contended that the challan of accused in the same F.I.R. was the breach of Art.13(a) of the Constitution, as well as in contravention of S.403, Cr.P.C. as the trial of accused would amount to double jeopardy, which was not warranted by law---.---Accused was convicted and sentenced under S.156(89) of the Customs Act, 1969 and under Ss.468 & 471, P.P.C.---.---Said provisions of two different statutes/laws had revealed that the offence of smuggling of goods was punishable under the Customs Act, 1969; whereas offences of forgery and using forged documents as genuine was punishable under Ss.468 & 471, P.P.C.---.---Said offences were notthe same, in circumstances---.---Second trial would be only barred when offence was the same and in case offences were different/distinct, then accused could be tried by the two different courts under two different enactments on the basis of common set of facts and trial would not be barred---.---Contention of counsel for accused having no force was repelled---.---Accused was not tried for the same offence, but for the different and distinct offences in different Courts; trial of accused, incircumstances was not barred under S.403, Cr.P.C. or on the principle of double jeopardy---.---Accused was arrested on 7-4-2003 and since then he was facing the hardship of trial---.---Nothing was on record to indicate that accused was habitual offender or was ever involved previously in the case of smuggling---.---Sentence of accused was reduced to the period already undergone by him. THIS JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY: GHULAM MUSTAFA MENGAL, JUSTICE:---.--- This Customs Appeal under…

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