1986 PLP 1798 (MLD)
MUHAMMAD MOHSIN‑‑Appellant Versus THE STATE Respondent
| Citation | 1986 PLP 1798 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | Mamoon Kazi, J |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD MOHSIN‑‑Appellant Versus THE STATE Respondent |
| Primary Law | Penal Code (XLV of 1860)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1986 PLP 1798 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1986 PLP 1798 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: Mamoon Kazi, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1986 PLP 1798 (MLD) (MUHAMMAD MOHSIN‑‑Appellant Versus THE STATE Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Nooruddin Sarki for Appellant.
- Date of hearing:‑ 17th June, .1986.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑ S. 409‑‑Embezzlement‑‑Appeal only pressed for reduction of sentence‑‑Amount involved in case small and already paid by accused‑‑ Accused suffered sufficiently by losing job and going through agony of facing prosecution and ordeal continued for him for last twelve years Sentence of imprisonment. reduced from two years to 3 months.‑ [Sentence]. A.G. Mangi, A.A.G. for the State.
Judgment & Decree
Nooruddin Sarki for Appellant. A.G. Mangi, A.A.G. for the State. Date of hearing:‑ 17th June, .1986. Mr. Nooruddin Sarki has not argued the case on merits but has only pressed for reduction of sentence awarded to the appellant. According to the learned counsel, the amount of Rs.3,277/52 which was alleged to have been embezzled ,by the appellant has already been deposited by him with the Department concerned. Additionally, it has been contended that the F.I.R. in the case was lodged on 13‑3‑1974 and since then the appellant has been undergoing the agony of investigation and trial and he has already suffered much on that account. The learned counsel has further contended that the appellant was departmentally proceeded against and on that account he lost his job and, therefore, has already suffered sufficient punishment. For such reasons it has been contended by Mr. Nooruddin Sarki that the sentence awarded to the appellant may be reduced. Mr. A .A .‑G . Mangi, the learned A . A .G . has also conceded that there are mitigating circumstances in the case which entitle the appellant to the concession of reduction in sentence. The contentions raised by Mr. Sarki do not 8190mPear to be without force. The amount involved in the case is small which appears to have already been paid by the appellant. Moreover, the appellant has suffered sufficiently by losing his job and going through the agony of facing prosecution and the ordeal as it appears, has continued for him for the last twelve years. Under such circumstances, in my opinion, three months' sentence would meet the ends of justice. The appeal is therefore, dismissed with this modification that sentence of the appellant is reduced from two years to 3 months R.l The sentence of fine of Rs.5,000 and in default further R.I. for 6~ months is, however, maintained. Since the appellant is on bail, his bail bonds are cancelled and he shall forthwith surrender himself before the learned trial Court. M.Y. H. ‑‑‑‑‑ Bail granted.