1991 P Cr (PLP)
NAZAR KHAN — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 1991 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | NAZAR KHAN — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1991 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1991 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1991 P Cr (PLP) (NAZAR KHAN — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Aurangzeb Chaudhry for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 243
Lahore Development Authority Act (XXX of 1975), Ss.18, 33 & 34-- Plea of guilty
Accused was tried for illegal possession of plots and pleaded guilty
Trial Court convicted accused without affording him opportunity to show cause
Accused could not have been convicted straightaway on pleading guilty and Trial Court was obliged to give him opportunity to show cause
Conviction and sentence was set aside and case was not sent for retrial in circumstances
Judgment & Decree
Nemo for the State. Date of hearing: 26th March, 1991. A complaint under section 18/33/34 of the Lahore Development Authority Act, 1975, on the charge of illegal possession of the plots was filed against Nazar Khan, petitioner. The trial Court framed charge under section 33/34, of L.D.A. Act, 1975 against him and he was asked as to whether or not he pleads guilty and the trial Court straightaway convicted him under section 33/34/18 of the L.DA. Act, 1975.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after the petitioner had pleaded guilty, the trial Court was obliged to give him further notice asking him to show cause why he should not be convicted on the admission of guilt made by him. No one has appeared for the State.
3. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel with care. I agree with him. The provisions of section 243, Cr.P.C. may be reproduced advantageously:-- Section
243. Cr.P.C. "If the accused admits that he has committed the offence with which he is charged, his admission shall be recorded as nearly as possible in the words used by him; and if he shows no sufficient cause why he should not be convicted, the Magistrate may convict him accordingly." The plain reading of the aforesaid provision of law will show that the accused could not have been straightaway convicted on his pleading guilty and the trial Court was obliged to give him opportunity to show cause as to why he should not be convicted. This being the position, there is no option but to accept this'' revision and set aside the conviction and sentence of the petitioner.
4. Now the question arises as to whether or not the case should be sent for retrial. I feel that in view of the nature of the case, it would not be proper to make the petitioner shuttlecock and direct retrial. He shall be released forthwith, if not required to be detained in any other case. SA./N-441/L Revision accepted