P (PLP)
CROWN‑Complainant‑Petitioner Versus KHUSHDIL KHAN‑Convict‑Respondent
| Citation | P (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Bacon, J. C. |
| Parties | CROWN‑Complainant‑Petitioner Versus KHUSHDIL KHAN‑Convict‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Bacon, J. C ---‑In this case an appeal by the accused is pending in the Court of the Sessions judge against conviction and sentence. The petition filed in this Court for enhancement of sentence is in my opinion premature. In the event of the accused succeeding in his appeal against conviction, there would be no question of enhancement of punishment. Admittedly, as argued by the Public Prosecutor, the Sessions judge has no jurisdiction to enhance a sentence in appeal of section 423 (1) (b) of the Criminal Procedure Code, but at the same time lie is competent to report the case to the High Court should be consider the sentence awarded by the Lower Court to be inadequate. The better course would be for the Public Prosecutor to convince the Sessions judge that a more severe sentence was called for and to move him to refer .the case to the High Court. I am not prepared to withdraw this case from the Session Court and dispose of the appeal and petition together. Such, Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 439‑Appeal pending in Sessions Court‑Petition for enhancement of sentence pre‑mature., For the above reasons, I reject this petition. |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in P (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Bacon, J. C ---‑In this case an appeal by the accused is pending in the Court of the Sessions judge against conviction and sentence. The petition filed in this Court for enhancement of sentence is in my opinion premature. In the event of the accused succeeding in his appeal against conviction, there would be no question of enhancement of punishment. Admittedly, as argued by the Public Prosecutor, the Sessions judge has no jurisdiction to enhance a sentence in appeal of section 423 (1) (b) of the Criminal Procedure Code, but at the same time lie is competent to report the case to the High Court should be consider the sentence awarded by the Lower Court to be inadequate. The better course would be for the Public Prosecutor to convince the Sessions judge that a more severe sentence was called for and to move him to refer .the case to the High Court. I am not prepared to withdraw this case from the Session Court and dispose of the appeal and petition together. Such, Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 439‑Appeal pending in Sessions Court‑Petition for enhancement of sentence pre‑mature., For the above reasons, I reject this petition., A. H. Petition rejected., a procedure would be unusual and I consider that the Public Prosecutor must await the result of the appeal pending in the Sessions Court. as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case P (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Bacon, J. C..
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: P (PLP) (CROWN‑Complainant‑Petitioner Versus KHUSHDIL KHAN‑Convict‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.