1990 PLP 486 (SCMR)
AKRAM KHAN and 2 others — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 1990 PLP 486 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Shariat Appellate Bench |
| Bench Members | Shafiur Rahman, Pir Muhammad Karam Shah arid |
| Parties | AKRAM KHAN and 2 others — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | (a) Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order (4 of 1979), (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1990 PLP 486 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: (a) Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order (4 of 1979), (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1990 PLP 486 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Shariat Appellate Bench bench comprising: Shafiur Rahman, Pir Muhammad Karam Shah arid.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1990 PLP 486 (SCMR) (AKRAM KHAN and 2 others — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Sh. Zamir Hussain, Advocate Supreme Court and Ch. Akhtar Ali, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners (in both Petitions).
- Muhammad Nawaz Abbasi, Assistant Advocate-General, Punjab for Respondent (in both Petitions).
- Date of hearing: 20th June, VS9.
- 3. The learned counsel representing them in this case wanted that benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C. .to be extended to them as he did not contest the conviction and sentence. Notice was given to the State. Mr. Muhammad Nawaz Abbasi, Assistant Advocate-General has appeared and he has` nothing to say in respect of this prayer made on behalf of the Petitioners. Therefore, we convert this Petition into an appeal and allow it to that limited extent and direct that in computing their sentence of imprisonment, benefit of section 382-B. Cr. P.C. shall be extended to them.
- 5. We had issued notice to the State and after hearing the learned Assistant Advocate-General (Mr. Muhammad Nawaz Abbasi), we convert this Petition also into an appeal and allow it. It is conceded that the appeal which wits incompetent could he treated as Revision and dealt with. The learned counsel for the Petitioner/owner has drawn our attention to the decisions given in the cases Haji Abdur Razzaq v. Pakistan (P L D 1974 S C 5) and Iqbal Elahi v. The State (1987 S C: M R 1274) to point out that notice to the owner and hearing him in the matter was requirement of the law before the confiscation of the vehicle could be ordered. We remand the matter (Cr.P.No.89-R(S /1988)to the Federal Shariat Court for disposal of the appeal as a Revision in the light of the law al2nli:;ihlc to the case.
Headnotes / Summary
(From the judgments of Federal Shariat Court, dated 4-10-1988 passed in Criminal Appeal No.101 /1 of 1988 and Criminal Appeal No.102/I of 1988).
Art's
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S.382-B
Accused praying for benefit of S.382-B, Cr.P.C. as they did not want to contest the conviction and sentence
Petition was converted into appeal and allowed to the extent that in computing sentence of accused, benefit of S. 382-B, Cr.P.C. should be extended to them.
S.516-A
Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order (4 of 1979), Art.3-- Confiscation of truck
Truck, in which Charas was found, was confiscated without notice to owner and hearing him
Case was remanded for disposal after notice and hearing the owner. Haji Abdur Rai7aq v. Pakistan P L D 1974 S C 5 and Iqbal Elahi v. The State 1987 S C M R 1274 rel.
Judgment & Decree
(b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)
S.516-A
Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order (4 of 1979), Art.3-- Confiscation of truck
Truck, in which Charas was found, was confiscated without notice to owner and hearing him
Case was remanded for disposal after notice and hearing the owner. Haji Abdur Rai7aq v. Pakistan P L D 1974 S C 5 and Iqbal Elahi v. The State 1987 S C M R 1274 rel. Sh. Zamir Hussain, Advocate Supreme Court and Ch. Akhtar Ali, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners (in both Petitions). Muhammad Nawaz Abbasi, Assistant Advocate-General, Punjab for Respondent (in both Petitions). Date of hearing: 20th June, VS
9. SHAFIUR RAHMAN, J.--The Petitioners in Criminal Petition No.88 R(S)/1988 stand convicted under Article 3 of Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order, 1979 and sentenced to three years' R.I. and a tine of Rs.1,000 or in default to undergo further six months' R.I. and ten stripes each.
2. Akram Khan, Petitioner No.l was driving the Truck No.7312-PRF and . Sher Gul, Petitioner No.2, was sitting alongwith him. At the check post 'Attock Khurd' it was searched and concealed chambers were discovered containing 268 packets of Charas weighing in alt 7 Maunds and 9 kilograms. They were found guilty, convicted and sentenced.
3. The learned counsel representing them in this case wanted that benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C. .to be extended to them as he did not contest the conviction and sentence. Notice was given to the State. Mr. Muhammad Nawaz Abbasi, Assistant Advocate-General has appeared and he has` nothing to say in respect of this prayer made on behalf of the Petitioners. Therefore, we convert this Petition into an appeal and allow it to that limited extent and direct that in computing their sentence of imprisonment, benefit of section 382-B. Cr. P.C. shall be extended to them.
4. The other Criminal Petition (Cr. P.No.89-R(S)/88) has been preferred by Khial Mansha who claims to be the owner of the Truck and he appealed to the Federal Shariat Court against the judgment of the trial Court confiscating the struck without allowing him an opportunity to show cause against it. The appeal was rejected on the ground that it was not competent and there was nothing illegal in the order.
5. We had issued notice to the State and after hearing the learned Assistant Advocate-General (Mr. Muhammad Nawaz Abbasi), we convert this Petition also into an appeal and allow it. It is conceded that the appeal which wits incompetent could he treated as Revision and dealt with. The learned counsel for the Petitioner/owner has drawn our attention to the decisions given in the cases Haji Abdur Razzaq v. Pakistan (P L D 1974 S C 5) and Iqbal Elahi v. The State (1987 S C: M R 1274) to point out that notice to the owner and hearing him in the matter was requirement of the law before the confiscation of the vehicle could be ordered. We remand the matter (Cr.P.No.89-R(S /1988)to the Federal Shariat Court for disposal of the appeal as a Revision in the light of the law al2nli:;ihlc to the case. M.A.K./A-591/5 Order accordingly