1994 P Cr (PLP)
BINYA MEEN NASIR alias PAPOO — Appellant Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 1994 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Federal Shariat Court |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | BINYA MEEN NASIR alias PAPOO — Appellant Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order (4 of 1979) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1994 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order (4 of 1979) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1994 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Federal Shariat Court bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1994 P Cr (PLP) (BINYA MEEN NASIR alias PAPOO — Appellant Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Headnotes / Summary
Arts. 3 & 16
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S.103
Police had raided the house of the accused in contravention of the provisions off` Art.16 of Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order, 1979, without a search-warrant and had also not followed the provisions of S.103, Cr.P.C. in the case
Contention that due to the said lapses on the part of the police, the entire proceedings resulting in the conviction of the accused were illegal, was not controverted by the prosecution
Accused was acquitted in circumstances.
Judgment & Decree
This is an appeal by Binya Meen alias Papoo, who, by means of judgment, dated the 10th March, 1993, has been convicted by Ch. Zulfiqar Ahmad Ghuman, Magistrate 1st Class, Lahore Cantt., under Article 3 of the Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order, 1979, hereinafter referred to as the Prohibition Order, and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years.
2. It was contended by learned counsel for the appellant that the police party raided the house of the appellant without a search-warrant and thus I contravened provisions of Article 16 of the Prohibition Order. It was also urged by him that the provisions of section 103 of the Code of Criminal Procedure were not followed by the police in the instant case. His contention was that due to above lapses on the part of the police, the entire proceedings resulting in the conviction of the appellant are illegal and he deserved to be acquitted. Learned counsel for the State concedes this position.
3. I, therefore, accept this appeal, set aside the conviction of the appellant under Article 3 of the Prohibition Order as well as the sentence awarded to him thereunder. He is thus acquitted and shall be set at liberty forthwith if not required in any other case. N.H.Q./883/FSC Appeal accepted.