2006 PLP 1456 (YLR)
NASEER AHMED — Petitioner Versus THE STATE and another — Respondents
| Citation | 2006 PLP 1456 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Sardar Muhammad Aslam, J |
| Parties | NASEER AHMED — Petitioner Versus THE STATE and another — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2006 PLP 1456 (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 2006 PLP 1456 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Sardar Muhammad Aslam, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2006 PLP 1456 (YLR) (NASEER AHMED — Petitioner Versus THE STATE and another — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Zafar Iqbal Chohan for Petitioner.
- Date of hearing: 11th July, 2005.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 426
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.337-L(ii), 337-F(i), 337-A(i)
Application for
Applicant, once was discharged from the case, but thereafter the Court summoned him
Such aspect of case had to be examined at the time of appeal
Allowing application, sentence was suspended and applicant was released on bail. Ch. Muhammad Nazir for the State.
Judgment & Decree
SARDAR MUHAMMAD ASLAM, J.
This is an application under section 426, Cr.P.C. for suspension of sentence awarded vide judgment, dated 30-11-2004 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Okara, whereby he convicted the petitioner Nastier Ahmad under sections 337-L(ii)/ 337-F(i)/337-A(i), P.P.C. and had sentenced him to imprisonment for one year each on each count and to pay Daman of Rs.3,000 each on each count, in default whereof he was to undergo further S.I. for one month each on each count. Similarly, he was also convicted under section 337-F(v), P.P.C. and sentenced to five years' R.I. and Daman of Rs.10,000 and in default whereof he was to further undergo S.I. for three months.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that initially the petitioner was found innocent and discharge report was submitted on 14-10-2003. Consequently, he was discharged from the case on 21-10-2003, but during the trial the Court summoned him.
3. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for suspension of sentence and release him on bail.
4. The petitioner was once discharged from the case but thereafter the Court summoned him. This aspect of the case has to be examined at the time of appeal. Resultantly, this application is allowed, sentence is suspended and petitioner is released on bail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.50,000 with one surety, in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. H.B.T./N-21/L Application allowed.