2001 PLP 1987 (SCMR)
GHULAM MUHAMMAD ‑‑‑Appellant Versus THE STATE‑‑‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 2001 PLP 1987 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Khalil‑ur‑Rehman Khan, Munir A. Sheikh and Wajeehuddin Ahmed, JJ |
| Parties | GHULAM MUHAMMAD ‑‑‑Appellant Versus THE STATE‑‑‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2001 PLP 1987 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2001 PLP 1987 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Khalil‑ur‑Rehman Khan, Munir A. Sheikh and Wajeehuddin Ahmed, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2001 PLP 1987 (SCMR) (GHULAM MUHAMMAD ‑‑‑Appellant Versus THE STATE‑‑‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- S.M. Tayyab, Senior Advocate Supreme Court for Appellant.
- Date of hearing: 31st May, 1999.
- Ch. Ghulam Muhammad, Advocate Supreme Court for the State.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment dated 14‑2‑1993 of Lahore High Court, Multan Bench, Multan passed in Criminal Appeal No. 113 of 1989 and Murder Reference No. 189 of 1989). ‑‑‑‑S. 382‑B‑‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.302‑‑‑Benefit of S.382‑B, Cr.P.C.‑‑‑No mention of S.382‑B, Cr.P.C. having been made in the judgment of High Court, it could not be said that benefit of the said section had been denied which should have been allowed to the accused‑‑‑Benefit of S.382‑B, Cr.P.C., was consequently granted to the accused by Supreme Court and the appeal was disposed of accordingly. Ch. Ghulam Muhammad, Advocate Supreme Court for the State.
Judgment & Decree
(On appeal from the judgment dated 14‑2‑1993 of Lahore High Court, Multan Bench, Multan passed in Criminal Appeal No. 113 of 1989 and Murder Reference No. 189 of 1989). ‑‑‑‑S. 382‑B‑‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.302‑‑‑Benefit of S.382‑B, Cr.P.C.‑‑‑No mention of S.382‑B, Cr.P.C. having been made in the judgment of High Court, it could not be said that benefit of the said section had been denied which should have been allowed to the accused‑‑‑Benefit of S.382‑B, Cr.P.C., was consequently granted to the accused by Supreme Court and the appeal was disposed of accordingly. S.M. Tayyab, Senior Advocate Supreme Court for Appellant. Ch. Ghulam Muhammad, Advocate Supreme Court for the State. Date of hearing: 31st May, 1999. Learned counsel for the appellant states that more than twenty two years sentence has been undergone calculating the substantive sentence served and the commission earned. He adds that benefit of section 382‑B, Cr.P.C. has not been allowed perhaps due to inadvertence. We have gone through the judgment of the High Court. There is no mention of section 382‑B, Cr.P.C. in the judgment and as such it cannot be said benefit of said section has been denied. The benefit of section 382‑B, Cr.P.C, should have been allowed to the appellant. We, therefore, grant benefit of section 382‑B of Cr.P.C. to the appellant and dispose of the appeal accordingly. N.H.Q./G-69/S Appeal allowed.