SCMR 2006

2006 PLP 1777 (SCMR)

RAB NAWAZ — Appellant Versus THE STATE — Respondent

Jurisdiction / Court
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Decided Date
Criminal Appeal No.423 of 2005 in J.P. No.153 of 2003, decided on 23rd June, 2006.
Honorable Judges
Faqir Muhammad Khokhar, M. Javed Buttar and Syed Jamshed Ali, JJ
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2006 PLP 1777 (SCMR)
Forum / Court Supreme Court of Pakistan
Bench Members Faqir Muhammad Khokhar, M. Javed Buttar and Syed Jamshed Ali, JJ
Parties RAB NAWAZ — Appellant Versus THE STATE — Respondent
Primary Law Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2006 PLP 1777 (SCMR)?

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 1777 (SCMR)?

The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Faqir Muhammad Khokhar, M. Javed Buttar and Syed Jamshed Ali, JJ.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 2006 PLP 1777 (SCMR) (RAB NAWAZ — Appellant Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)

Representation

  • M. Zaman Bhatti, Advocate Supreme Court for Appellant.
  • G.N. Gohar, Advocate Supreme Court for the State.

Headnotes / Summary

(On appeal from the judgment, dated 26-2-2003 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore passed in Criminal Appeal No.721 of 2000).

S. 382-B

Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.302

Benefit of S.382-B, Cr.P.C. not awarded by High Court

Counsel for State did not object to granting of such benefit to accused

Supreme Court granted such benefit for the period accused remained in jail. Ghulam Murtaza v. The State PLD 1998 SC 152 ref. G.N. Gohar, Advocate Supreme Court for the State.

Judgment & Decree

FAQIR MUHAMMAD KHOKHAR, J.

The learned counsel for the appellant does not press this appeal on merits. He however, states that the question of grant or otherwise of the benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C., was not considered by the High Court. He refers to the case of Ghulam Murtaza v. The State PLD 1998 SC

152. The learned counsel for the State has no objection if benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C. is granted to the appellant in view of facts and circumstances of the case.

2. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties this criminal appeal is partly allowed. The conviction and the substantive sentence of the appellant as awarded by the trial Court is maintained. However, the appellant is granted benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C. for the period he remained in jail. S.A.K./R-13/SC Order accordingly.