2005 PLP 586 (MLD)
NAEEM ARSHAD — Petitioner Versus SUPERINTENDENT OF NEW CENTRAL JAIL, MULTAN — Respondent
| Citation | 2005 PLP 586 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | NAEEM ARSHAD — Petitioner Versus SUPERINTENDENT OF NEW CENTRAL JAIL, MULTAN — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2005 PLP 586 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2005 PLP 586 (MLD)?
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: 2005 PLP 586 (MLD) (NAEEM ARSHAD — Petitioner Versus SUPERINTENDENT OF NEW CENTRAL JAIL, MULTAN — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Mehar Tahir Amjad for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S.397
Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997), S.9(c)
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.199
Constitutional petition
Trial of accused simultaneously in two cases and conviction on same day
Petition to treat sentence in both cases concurrently
Petitioner/accused was tried in two cases simultaneously by the Court and was convicted in both cases on same day for different periods of sentences
Petitioner/accused in his Constitutional petition had prayed for direction to treat sentence in both cases concurrently
Accused was implicated in second case with an interval of four days
Both cases having been tried simultaneously, Trial Court should have ordered sentence of accused to run concurrently under S.397, Cr.P.C.
High Court accepting petition ordered that both sentences awarded to accused should run concurrently.
Judgment & Decree
Naeem Arshad petitioner was tried in two cases separately bearing F.I.R. No.227 of 2001 dated 19-10-2001 under section 9(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, registered at Police Station Sadar District Vehari. Both the cases were simultaneously tried by Mr. Muhammad Shafique Butt, learned Additional Sessions Judge, Burewala and convicted on the same day i.e. on 8-1-2004 in both the cases. In case F.I.R. No.227 of 2001 he was sentenced to four year rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.20,000 under section 9(c) of the Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, and in case F.I.R. No.230 of 2001, he was sentenced to imprisonment for two years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.20,
000. He was allowed the benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C. He was directed to suffer six months simple imprisonment, in case of default in the payment of fine in both the cases. However, he was allowed benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C. in both the cases.
2. Through this petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973, the petitioner has prayed for a direction to the Superintendent New Central Jail Multan to treat the sentence of the petitioner in both the cases concurrently. The petitioner has been in jail since October, 2001. He was implicated in the second case with an interval of four days. Both the cases were tried simultaneously, as such, the learned trial Court should have ordered the sentence of the appellant to run concurrently under section 397, Cr.P.C. This petition is allowed. Both the sentences are ordered to run concurrently. This petition stands disposed of. H.B.T./N-140/L Petition allowed.