2010 P Cr (PLP)
JAVED AKHTAR — Applicant Versus THE STATE and another — Respondents
| Citation | 2010 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | JAVED AKHTAR — Applicant Versus THE STATE and another — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2010 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2010 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: 2010 P Cr (PLP) (JAVED AKHTAR — Applicant Versus THE STATE and another — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- 3. The learned Deputy Prosecutor-General has opposed the submission made on behalf of the applicant. However, the learned counsel for respondent No. 2/complainant has shown no objection to the suspension of his sentence.
Headnotes / Summary
S.426
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 468, 471 & I09
Prevention of Corruption Act (II of 1947), S.5
Forgery, using as genuine a forged document, abetment
Accused had been sentenced to undergo two years' R.L for the offences proved against him
Sentence of accused was short (two years) and his appeal was not likely to be heard in near future by High Court
Sentence of accused was consequently suspended and he was released on trial accordingly.
Judgment & Decree
CH. IFTIKHAR HUSSAIN, J.
Petitioner Javed Akhtar by way of the instant application has prayed for suspension of his sentence and admitting him to bail pending disposal of his appeal.
2. It has been submitted on his behalf that his sentence is short and so, he is entitled to be released on bail by suspending his sentence pending disposal of his appeal.
3. The learned Deputy Prosecutor-General has opposed the submission made on behalf of the applicant. However, the learned counsel for respondent No. 2/complainant has shown no objection to the suspension of his sentence.
4. The applicant vide the impugned judgment dated 24-4-2010, recorded by Malik Nazir Ahmad, learned Special Judge, Anti-Corruption, Lahore, has been convicted under sections 468, 471 and 109, P.P.C. and sentenced to two years R.I. in each offence along with fine of Rs. 20,000 in each offence and in default of payment of fine in each offence further undergo S.I. for two months in each. He was also convicted under section 5 of the Prevention of Corruption Act No. II of 1947 and sentenced to two years' R.I. along with fine of Rs. 10,000 and in default of payment of fine further undergo S.I. for one month. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently except the sentences in default of payment of fine and he was extended the benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C.
5. His sentence, thus, is short. There is no prospect of early hearing of the main appeal in the near future. I, therefore, in such facts and circumstances of his case, have been persuaded to suspend his sentence. The application, therefore, is allowed and his sentence is suspended and he pending disposal of his appeal is admitted to bail in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 (Rupees one hundred thousand only) with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Deputy Registrar (Judicial) of this Court. N.H.Q./J-12/L Sentence suspended.