1986 P Cr (PLP)
MUHAMMAD ASHRAF Petitioner Versus THE STATE Respondent
| Citation | 1986 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | Munawar Ali Khan, J |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD ASHRAF Petitioner Versus THE STATE Respondent |
| Primary Law | Penal Code (XLV of 1860)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1986 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1986 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: Munawar Ali Khan, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1986 P Cr (PLP) (MUHAMMAD ASHRAF Petitioner Versus THE STATE Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Syed Hamid Ali Rizvi for Petitioner.
- Date of hearing: 17th March, 1985.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑S. 354‑‑First Information Report showing that all that accused did amounted only to an attempt to commit offence of outraging modesty of victim-‑Accused already remaining in jail for twenty‑five days and his case lingering on since long‑‑Besides mental agony accused suffered both morally as well as materially and had been adequately punished‑ Counsel for State sharing same view‑‑Imprisonment already undergone by accused, held, sufficient to meet ends of justice‑‑Sentence of accused reduced to what he had already undergone. Akhlaq Ahmad Siddiqui for the State.
Judgment & Decree
Syed Hamid Ali Rizvi for Petitioner. Akhlaq Ahmad Siddiqui for the State. Date of hearing: 17th March, 1985. The applicant Muhammad Ashraf was sent up in Court under section 354, P.P.C. The allegations against him are that on 31‑8‑1977 while the complainant Mst. Zulekhan was in her hut, he went inside but and outraged her modesty. On her cries number of persons including Ghulam Mustafa and Ghulam Ali arrived. They apprehended the applicant at the spot and took him to Police Station where F.I.R. was lodged and after the investigation the accused was challaned. The learned trial Court by its judgment dated 25‑9‑1980 convicted the applicant and sentenced him to R.I. for three months. The appeal preferred by the applicant from the judgment of the trial Court also failed, vide judgment of VIIth Additional Sessions Judge, Karachi, dated 8‑12‑1982. It is in these circumstances that the present Revision Application has been filed. The learned counsel for the applicant who was heard in support of Revision Application did not press it on merits. He, however, prayed for reduction of the sentence. It is admitted on both hands that the applicant has already remained in Jail for nearly 25 days. Moreover, the case has been lingering on ever since the applicant was arrested on 31‑8‑1977. In the meantime it can be well‑imagined that besides mental agony the applicant has undergone, he has suffered both morally as well as materially. In my opinion the applicant has been adequately punished. This view is also shared by the learned State counsel. Moreover on perusal of the F. I. R. It would appear that all that the petitioner did amount only to an attempt to commit the offence of outraging the modesty. For above reasons I hold that the imprisonment that applicant has already undergone would meet the ends of justice and it would be neither proper nor called for to send the applicant back to jail after B about a lapse of 21 years when he was released on bail by this Court. Accordingly the sentence awarded to the applicant is reduced to the one he has already undergone. Subject to this modification in the sentence the Revision Application is dismissed. M.Y.H. Sentence reduced.