1978 PLP 292 (SCMR)
ABDUL REHMAN-Petitioner Versus THE STATE-Respondent
| Citation | 1978 PLP 292 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | ----O. XXVI-Review--Petition for review barred by 1119 days Mistake, however, apparent, on face of record and petitioner, an illiterate man, in jail all through--Delay in filing review petition con doned in circumstances.--Review----Condonation of delay. |
| Bench Members | Qaisar Khan, Muhammad Haleem, |
| Parties | ABDUL REHMAN-Petitioner Versus THE STATE-Respondent |
| Primary Law | (a) Supreme Court Rules 1956, (b) Constitution of Pakistan (1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1978 PLP 292 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: (a) Supreme Court Rules 1956, (b) Constitution of Pakistan (1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1978 PLP 292 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the ----O. XXVI-Review--Petition for review barred by 1119 days Mistake, however, apparent, on face of record and petitioner, an illiterate man, in jail all through--Delay in filing review petition con doned in circumstances.--Review----Condonation of delay. bench comprising: Qaisar Khan, Muhammad Haleem,.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1978 PLP 292 (SCMR) (ABDUL REHMAN-Petitioner Versus THE STATE-Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Noor Ahmad Noori, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner.
- Date of hearing : 14th May 1978.
- Noor Ahmad Noori, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
- Notice had been issued in this case to the Advocate on Record for the State but no body cared to appear despite service. After hearing Mr. Noor Ahmad Noori, Advocate on Record for the petitioner we have come to the conclusion that the review petition deserves acceptance. The occurrence took place in 1964 when punishment for murder was death or transportation for 1 life. Transportation for life under section 57, P. P. C. meant transportation for 20 years. The amendment in the Penal Code was introduced with effect from the 14th of April 1972, by Law Reforms Ordinance XII of 1972. Accord ing to the amended section 302 the punishment for murder was death or life imprisonment and life; imprisonment according to section 57, P. P. C. meant imprisonment for 25 years.
Headnotes / Summary
(On review from the order of this Court in Criminal Appeal No. K-22 of 1973, dated the 1st of April 1975, against the judgment and order of the High Court of Sind & Baluchistan, Karachi, dated the 10th of August 1971 in Crl. Appeal No. 239 of 1970/Confirmation Case No. 35 of 1970).
O. XXVI-Review--Petition for review barred by 1119 days Mistake, however, apparent, on face of record and petitioner, an illiterate man, in jail all through--Delay in filing review petition con doned in circumstances.--[Review
Art. 12 and Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 302 [as standing before and after enactment of Law Reforms Ordinance (XII of 1972)] read with S. 57-Imprisonment for life--Transportation for life-Occur rence taking place in 1964, punishment for murder then being death or transportation for life-Transportation for life under S. 57 meaning transportation for 20 years-Amendment in Penal Code, 1860, introduced by haw Reforms Ordinance, 1972, with effect from 14-4-1972, and according to S. 302 thus amended punishment for murder either death or life imprisonment and life imprisonment according to S. 57 of meaning imprisonment for 25 years-No law, held, could authorise punishment for an offence by a penalty greater than penalty prescribed by law for such offence at time of its commission and accused could not be sentenced to life imprisonment-Petitioner's punishment converted to transportation for life.-[Sentence]. Nemo for the State.
Judgment & Decree
QAISAR KHAN, J.‑‑Abdul Rehman was tried by the Additional Sessions Judge Hyderabad for the murder of two police officials and by his judgment dated the 6th of June 1970 sentenced to death on both counts. The appeal of the convict was dismissed by the High Court on the 10th of August 1971 and the death sentences, were confirmed The convict filed petition for special leave to appeal in this Court which was granted and this Court by its judgment dated the 1st of April 1975 accepted the appeal to the extent that the death sentences were commuted to life imprisonments. Abdul Rehman has filed this review petition praying for converting his sentences from life imprisonment to transportation for life. The petition is barred by 1119 days but since the mistake was apparent on the face of the,, record and the petitioner who is an illiterate man was in jail all through we would therefore condone the delay in filing this petition. Notice had been issued in this case to the Advocate on Record for the State but no body cared to appear despite service. After hearing Mr. Noor Ahmad Noori, Advocate on Record for the petitioner we have come to the conclusion that the review petition deserves acceptance. The occurrence took place in 1964 when punishment for murder was death or transportation for 1 life. Transportation for life under section 57, P. P. C. meant transportation for 20 years. The amendment in the Penal Code was introduced with effect from the 14th of April 1972, by Law Reforms Ordinance XII of 1972. Accord ing to the amended section 302 the punishment for murder was death or life imprisonment and life; imprisonment according to section 57, P. P. C. meant imprisonment for 25 years. According to Article 12 of the Constitution no law could authorise punishment of a person for an offence by a penalty greater than the penalty prescribed by law for the offence at the time the offence was committed. The accused could not therefore be sentenced to life imprisonment. He bad to be sentenced to transportation for life. We therefore accept this petition and convert the punishment of the petitioner on each of the two counts to transportation for life instead of life imprisonment. Petition accepted.