2005 PLP 1292 (YLR)
RAJA JAMIL alias JAMSHED — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2005 PLP 1292 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | Ghulam Nabi Soomro and Muhammad Mujeebullah Siddiqui, JJ |
| Parties | RAJA JAMIL alias JAMSHED — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2005 PLP 1292 (YLR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2005 PLP 1292 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: Ghulam Nabi Soomro and Muhammad Mujeebullah Siddiqui, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2005 PLP 1292 (YLR) (RAJA JAMIL alias JAMSHED — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Headnotes / Summary
S.561-A
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.324/353/34
West Pakistan Arms Ordinance (XX of 1965), S.13-D
Sentences sought to run concurrently
Accused had been convicted and sentenced to different terms of imprisonments in two different cases, one registered under Ss.324/253/34, P.P.C. and the other under S.13-D of the Arms Ordinance
Trial Court's order was silent about the running of the sentences in the two cases either concurrently or consecutively
Both the cases were stated to have been registered on the same day and the arms case was an offshoot of the main case
Accused, thus, was entitled to the relief prayed by him and the sentences awarded to him in the said two cases were consequently directed to run concurrently. Crl. Misc. No.344 of 1998 dated 4-2-1999 ref. Mumtaz Ali Khan Deshmukh for Applicnat. Habib Ahmed, A.A.-G. for the State.
Judgment & Decree
Through this petition under section 561-A, Cr.P.C., the applicant Raja Jamil alias Jamshed son of Muhammad Rafiq, who stands convicted separately in two cases bearing F.I.R. No.191 of 1995 under sections 324/353/34, P.P.C. and F.I.R. No.192 of 1995 under section 13-D Arms Ordinance, both registered at Police Station, Defence, sentenced to different sentences of imprisonment by the Ist Additional Sessions Judge, Karachi (South), prays running of such sentences concurrently. The learned counsel contends that the arms case in F.I.R. No.192 of 1995 under section 13-(D) and the main case F.I.R. No.191 of 1995 under sections 324/ 353/34, P.P.C. were registered on the same day i.e. 12-11-2001, the arms case, being the offshoot of the main case. In support of his contention he has placed before us a Photostat copy of an unreported judgment passed in Crl. Miscellaneous No.344 of 1998 dated 4-2-1999. Mr. Habib Ahmed, learned A.A.-G. on the other hand, states that it is purely the discretion of the Courts to allow such benefit and the trial Court's order is silent in that regard. Having gone through the above referred judgment, we are of the view that the applicant is entitled in the relief prayed by him. Accordingly we direct that the sentences passed against the applicant in the aforesaid two cases shall run concurrently. Disposed of. N.H.Q./J-17/K Petition allowed.