2007 PLP 860(1) (YLR)
ALI NAWAZ — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2007 PLP 860(1) (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | Munib Ahmed Khan, J |
| Parties | ALI NAWAZ — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2007 PLP 860(1) (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 2007 PLP 860(1) (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: Munib Ahmed Khan, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2007 PLP 860(1) (YLR) (ALI NAWAZ — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Headnotes / Summary
S. 426
West Pakistan Arms Ordinance (XX of 1965), S.13(d)
Application for suspension of conviction and sentence
Counsel for accused had contended that there was no private witness, while accused was allegedly arrested from Bus stand; that there was material contradiction in the evidence of prosecution witnesses which was not appreciated by the Trial Court or even by the Appellate Court and that accused was falsely involved in another case, and in that case he was acquitted
Operation of impugned judgment was suspended subject to furnishing of surety. Abdul Rasool Abbasi for Applicant.
Judgment & Decree
MUNIB AHMED KHAN, J.--Granted.
2. Granted subject to all just exceptions. 3 &
4. Learned counsel submits that the accused was arrested on 11-7-2003 under the charge of 13-D 'of the Arms Ordinance within the area of Police Station Rukkan. He was granted bail by the trial Court but finally he was convicted for one year sentence and fine Rs.5,000 by its order dated 10-5-2006 and was remanded to jail. He further states that against the said order appeal filed by the applicant was dismissed by the Sessions Judge, Dadu, by his judgment dated 27-6-2006 and during that period he remained in Jail and so far he was confined in the Jail for about three months. Learned counsel contended that there was no private witness while the accused was allegedly arrested from the bus stand. He further submitted that there is material contradiction in' the evidence of prosecution witnesses which were not appreciated by the learned trial Court or even by the appellate Court and that the accused was also falsely involved in another case, related to this case but he was acquitted from that case. Admit. Notice. Meanwhile the operation of the impugned judgment of the Sessions Judge dated 27 6-2006 is suspended subject to furnishing of surety in the sum of Rs.50,000 (Fifty thousand) and P. R. bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of Additional Registrar of this Court. H.B.T./A-9/K Application allowed.