1992 P Cr (PLP)
VALERIUS MUGHAMBI‑‑‑Appellant Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1992 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Ijaz Nisar, J |
| Parties | VALERIUS MUGHAMBI‑‑‑Appellant Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Customs Act (IV of 1969)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1992 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Customs Act (IV of 1969)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1992 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Ijaz Nisar, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1992 P Cr (PLP) (VALERIUS MUGHAMBI‑‑‑Appellant Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Nazir Ahmad Shami for Appellant.
- Date of hearing: 25th September, 1991.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑S. 156(1)(8)‑‑‑Allegation of smuggling of heroin‑‑‑Prosecution case against accused had fully been proved‑‑‑Accused who had not seriously challenged his conviction, had pleaded for reduction of sentence awarded to him by Trial Court‑‑‑In view of fact that accused was a foreigner and intended to leave Pakistan as soon as he was released from jail, Court taking a lenient view, reduced' sentence to period of imprisonment already undergone by him. Nemo for the State.
Judgment & Decree
Valerius Mugambi, Tanzanian National was tried by Special Judge, Customs, Lahore for attempting to smuggle heroin out of Pakistan. By judgment, dated 29‑5‑1990, the learned Court convicted him under section 1560)(8) of the Customs Act, 1969 and sentenced him to 7 years' R.I. and a fine of Rs.50,000 or in default to undergo further R.I. for a period of one year with benefit of section 382‑B, Cr.P.C. He has appealed.
2. The prosecution case is that on 19th March, 1989, the appellant came to the Customs Zone at Lahore Airport for going to Dubai by P.I.A. On suspicion, his person was X‑rayed which revealed the presence of some foreign elements in his body. He was taken to the hospital and administered medicine. Resultantly, two egg‑shaped capsules came out from his rectum containing 130 grams of heroin. He was consequently challaned.
3. At the trial, the ocular account was furnished by Muhammad Ijaz~ Inspector Customs P.W.3 and Qadeer Ahmad Baig P.W.5.
4. The appellant denied the prosecution allegations 4‑A. Relying on the prosecution evidence, the learned trial Court convicted and sentenced the appellant as described above.
5. I have heard the learned counsel for the appellant. He has not seriously challenged his conviction and pleads for reduction of sentence. A According to him, the appellant is a foreigner and has already undergone sufficient punishment.
6. A perusal of the record fully proves the prosecution case against the appellant. However, keeping in view the fact that he is a foreigner and intends to leave Pakistan as soon as he is released from jail, I take a lenient view and B think that the ends of justice would be met if his sentence is reduced to the peirod of imprisonment already undergone by him plus a fine of Rs.10,000 or in default to undergo one month's R.I. This concession has been granted to him because he is stated to be behind the bars since 19‑3‑1989. 7: With the above modification in the sentence, the appeal is otherwise dismissed. H.B.T./V‑1/L Appeal dismissed/sentence reduced.