2005 PLP 3161 (YLR)
BEERBAL alias BEERO — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2005 PLP 3161 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | Zia Perwaz and Amir Hani Muslim, JJ |
| Parties | BEERBAL alias BEERO — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | West Pakistan Arms Ordinance (XX of 1965) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2005 PLP 3161 (YLR)?
This judgment primarily cites: West Pakistan Arms Ordinance (XX of 1965) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2005 PLP 3161 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: Zia Perwaz and Amir Hani Muslim, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2005 PLP 3161 (YLR) (BEERBAL alias BEERO — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Jai Jai Veshno Mange Ram for Appellant.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 13(d)
Accused did not press appeal on merits, but had requested for leniency in sentence
State counsel did not object the disposal of appeal in said terms
Accused was in custody since his conviction and he had remained in jail for about 3-112 years
Taking lenient view, sentence of accused was reduced to that of already undergone
Appeal was dismissed with said modification. Abdul Karim v. State 1999 PCr.LJ 186 and Asghar v. State 2004 PCr.LJ 2048 ref. Mushtaque Ahmed Korejo for the State.
Judgment & Decree
ZIA PERWAZ, J.
Contention of the learned counsel for the appellant is that the case pertains to recovery of K.K. from an open field. The accused Beerbal would be subject to appropriate punishment in cases where he absconded and they are to be disposed of on their own merits. The F.I.R. in the present case of recovery does not show that the weapon was being used for commission of any offence at the time of recovery and it is a mere case of recovery as such learned counsel does not press this appeal on merits but requests for leniency in the sentence. Reliance is also placed on the case of Abdul Karim v. State 1999 PCr.LJ 186 and Asghar v. State 2004 PCr.LJ 2048. Learned State counsel after going through the record does not object to the disposal of this appeal in the above terms. We have carefully gone through the record. Appellant was arrested on 15-7-2000. He was granted bail on 12-6-2001 while he was released from jail on 6-8-2002. The appellant was convicted on 18-3-2004 and since then he is in custody. The appellant has remained in jail for about 3 years, 5 months and 21 days. Accordingly, taking lenient view the sentence of the appellant is reduced to that of already undergone. The appellant is allowed to be released from jail if not required in any custody case. With this modification the appeal is dismissed. H.B.T./B-29/K Appeal dismissed.