1975 PLP 178 (SCMR)
KHALID SHARIF — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 1975 PLP 178 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | KHALID SHARIF — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1975 PLP 178 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1975 PLP 178 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1975 PLP 178 (SCMR) (KHALID SHARIF — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ansar Hussain, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Anwar Ali, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner.
- Date of hearing : 16th September 1974.
- Ansar Hussain, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Anwar Ali, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of Sind & Baluchistan, dated the 11th April 1974, in Criminal Revision No. 48 of 1974). -- Art. 185(3)-Point never raised before High Court-Cannot be permitted to be raised at leave to appeal stage. Nemo for the State.
Judgment & Decree
SALAHUDDIN AHMED, J.‑‑The petitioner was convicted and sentenced under section 6 (1) (a) and (c) read with section 23 of the West Pakistan Pure Food Ordinance, 1960. On appeal the learned Additional Sessions Judge maintained the conviction but reduced the sentence. The conviction and sentence has been maintained by the High Court of Sind & Baluchistan in revision. The prosecution case was that the petitioner was found to have stored in his shop for sale 'Atta' in which Gluton was 1 per cent less than required under the rules framed under the said Ordinance. Under the rules the Atta should have contained 8 per cent Gluton. The Public Analyst, however, found that it was 1 per cent less. The seizure of the Atta from the shop of the petitioner is not challenged. The High Court concurred in the findings of the two Courts holding the petitioner guilty. On behalf of the petitioner the following contentions were raised before us:‑- (1) The Public Analyst was not legally appointed. (2) Since the analysis was done 7 days after the taking of samples the Atta deteriorated due to damp climate, of Karachi. These points were never raised before the High Court and cannot now be permitted to be raised. There is no substance in the petition and it is, accordingly, dismissed. The petitioner shall now surrender to his bail bond and serve out the remainder of the sentence of imprisonment imposed on him. Petition dismissed.