1983 P Cr (PLP)
ISMAIL‑Applicant Versus THE STATE‑Respondent
| Citation | 1983 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | ISMAIL‑Applicant Versus THE STATE‑Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1983 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1983 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1983 P Cr (PLP) (ISMAIL‑Applicant Versus THE STATE‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- 3. Since the learned Additional Advocate‑General, Mr. Abdul Sattar Shaikh, who is present in Court has waived the notice of the main petition as well as the above application, with the consent of the learned Advocate for the applicant, I have taken up the above Revision petition for regular hearing and consequently it is not necessary to pass any orders on this application.
- The learned Advocate for the applicant in support of the above Revision petition submitted, that according to the Certificate of the Police Surgeon, which is based on the requisite tests, the age of the applicant is 15 years and as such the learned Vth Additional Sessions Judge, Karachi has erred in passing impugned order dated 16‑8‑1982 and consequently the said order cannot legally be sustained. In support of this contention the learned Advocate for the applicant relied upon cases reported in P L D 1952 Pesh. 27, P L D 1966 Pesh. 97 and 1975 P Cr. L J 936.
- The learned Additional Advocate‑General appearing for the State conceded, that in view of the D. B. Decision of this Court reported in 1975 P Cr. L J 936, the medical certificate of the Police Surgeon, which is based on tests ought to have been accepted, rather than the school certificate and birth certificate issued by the K. M. C.
- I have heard submissions made by the learned Advocate for the applicant and A. A.‑G. and I have gone through the cases cited by the Advocate for the applicant as well as through the impugned order. Even according to the school leaving certificate the age of the applicant would be 16 years and one month on the date of offence and according to the birth certificate of the applicant it would be about 17 years and five months. In view of this difference in the dates in these two certificates, and keeping in view the D. B. decision of this Court, the age certificate issued by the Police Surgeon ought to have been accepted by the learned Vth Additional Sessions Judge, Karachi, as the said certificate is based on various tests and as such more reliable.
Headnotes / Summary
Medical certificate of Police Surgeon based on tests, held, to be accepted rather than school certificate and birth certificate issued by Municipal Committee.
Judgment & Decree
1975 P Cr. L 1936 rel. M. H. Shah for Applicant. Abdul Sattar Shaikh, A. A.‑G. for the State.
1. Granted.
2. Admit. Notice.
3. Since the learned Additional Advocate‑General, Mr. Abdul Sattar Shaikh, who is present in Court has waived the notice of the main petition as well as the above application, with the consent of the learned Advocate for the applicant, I have taken up the above Revision petition for regular hearing and consequently it is not necessary to pass any orders on this application. The learned Advocate for the applicant in support of the above Revision petition submitted, that according to the Certificate of the Police Surgeon, which is based on the requisite tests, the age of the applicant is 15 years and as such the learned Vth Additional Sessions Judge, Karachi has erred in passing impugned order dated 16‑8‑1982 and consequently the said order cannot legally be sustained. In support of this contention the learned Advocate for the applicant relied upon cases reported in P L D 1952 Pesh. 27, P L D 1966 Pesh. 97 and 1975 P Cr. L J
936. The learned Additional Advocate‑General appearing for the State conceded, that in view of the D. B. Decision of this Court reported in 1975 P Cr. L J 936, the medical certificate of the Police Surgeon, which is based on tests ought to have been accepted, rather than the school certificate and birth certificate issued by the K. M. C. I have heard submissions made by the learned Advocate for the applicant and A. A.‑G. and I have gone through the cases cited by the Advocate for the applicant as well as through the impugned order. Even according to the school leaving certificate the age of the applicant would be 16 years and one month on the date of offence and according to the birth certificate of the applicant it would be about 17 years and five months. In view of this difference in the dates in these two certificates, and keeping in view the D. B. decision of this Court, the age certificate issued by the Police Surgeon ought to have been accepted by the learned Vth Additional Sessions Judge, Karachi, as the said certificate is based on various tests and as such more reliable. I, therefore, allow the above Revision Petition and set aside the impugned order dated 16‑8‑1982 of the learned Vth Additional Sessions Judge, Karachi, e and direct, that the applicant be tried under the provisions of Sind Children Act, 1955, as on the date of commission of offence, according to the certificate of the Police Surgeon, he was only 15 years old. The above Revision Petition stands disposed of in terms of the above order. Appeal dismissed.