2012 P Cr (PLP)
MAJID alias MAJU — Petitioner Versus THE STATE and another — Respondents
| Citation | 2012 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | MAJID alias MAJU — Petitioner Versus THE STATE and another — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2012 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 2012 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: 2012 P Cr (PLP) (MAJID alias MAJU — Petitioner Versus THE STATE and another — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ch. Imran Khalid Amratsari for Petitioner
Headnotes / Summary
S. 426
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.365-A
Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997), S.7(e)
Constitution of Pakistan, Art.199
Suspension of sentence on the basis of compromise
Not allowed
Accused had been held guilty for abduction of a minor aged two years for ransom
Initial presumption of innocence in favour of accused, thus, had vanished
Complainant was stated to have forgiven the accused in the name of Allah Almighty and on this ground alone sentence of imprisonment for life awarded to him was sought to be suspended
Accused was involved in a heinous offence against the society
Cases of abduction for ransom had alarmingly increased
Persons involved in such nefarious activities had put the parents of the poor victims to the agony of sleepless nights
Society had been put to shock and fear due to the activities of the outlaws in cases of abduction for ransom, which must be checked otherwise the social structure and norms of the civil society might collapse
Act of the accused could not be lost sight of in the name of the compromise
Constitutional petition was dismissed accordingly.
Judgment & Decree
RAUF AHMAD SHEIKH, J.
The petitioner seeks suspension of sentence awarded to him by the learned Judge, Anti-Terrorism Court-II, Multan, vide judgment dated 6-7-2011 in case F.I.R. No.1050 of 2010 dated 21-9-2010 Police Station Gulgasht, District Multan, whereby he was convicted under section 365-A, P.P.C. and was sentenced to imprisonment for life. He was also convicted under section 7(e) of the Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 and was sentenced to imprisonment for life and his property was also ordered to be forfeited.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the complainant has forgiven the convict/petitioner in the name of Allah Almighty. It is urged that the compounding of the offence and mutual compromise bring peace and harmony in the society so the petitioner is entitled to bail through suspension of sentence. In support of the contentions raised, reliance is placed on Ghulam Ali v. The State and another (1997 SCMR 1411), Ghulam Shabbir and 2 others v The State (2003 SCMR 663) and Aziz Khan and another v The State and another (2004 PCr.LJ 490)
3. Learned AAG has stated that in view of the judgment passed by the august Supreme Court of Pakistan reported as 2003 SCMR 663, this Court may accord permission to compound the offence and suspend the sentence keeping in view the facts of the case.
4. The petitioner was held guilty for abduction of a minor aged 2 years for ransom. The initial presumption of innocence in favour of the petitioner/accused has evaporated due to verdict of the Court. He is involved in an offence of heinous nature against the society. The cases of abduction for ransom have increased alarmingly in the recent past. The persons involved in nefarious activities have put the parents of poor victims to the agony of sleepless nights. The permission to compound the offence punishable under section 302, P.P.C. is a different matter because on commission of Qatl-e-amd, an adult sane Wali may waive his right of qisas under section 309, P.P.C. and same is also compoundable under section 310, P.P.C. read with section 345(2), Cr.P.C. with the permission of the court. The judgments passed by the august Supreme Court of Pakistan, which is relied upon by learned counsel for the petitioner are not applicable on the facts of the present petition. The case law reported as 2004 PCr.LJ 490 (Peshawar) is also on distinguished facts. The society has been put to shock and fear due to the activities of the outlaws involved in cases of abduction for ransom and it is high time to check the same otherwise our social structure and norms of the civil society may collapse. The awesome act of the petitioner cannot be lost sight of in the name of the compromise.
5. For the reasons supra, the writ petition is without merits and the same is hereby dismissed. N.H.Q./M-371/L Petition dismissed.