2004 PLP 961 (SCMR)
MUHAMMAD IRFAN — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2004 PLP 961 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Javed Iqbal and Faqir Muhammad Khokhar , JJ |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD IRFAN — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Prevention of Corruption Act (II of 1947) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2004 PLP 961 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Prevention of Corruption Act (II of 1947) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2004 PLP 961 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Javed Iqbal and Faqir Muhammad Khokhar , JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2004 PLP 961 (SCMR) (MUHAMMAD IRFAN — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Pervez I. Mir, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner.
- Date of hearing: 14th January, 2003.
- Abdul Rauf Farooqi, Advocate Supreme Court for the State.
- 3-A. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner on 10-1-2003, we issued a notice to the Advocate General only on the question of quantum of sentence. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner had suffered loss of service on account of his conviction and sentence. He had also faced protracted criminal trial A and other proceedings for over a period of 10 years. He had already served actual imprisonment for more than one year and only 2 or 3 months were left for the expiry of his sentence of 1-1/2 years. It would serve the interest of justice if the sentence of the petitioner was reduced to that already undergone by him.
- 4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of Advocate General, Punjab, to be fair to him, frankly stated that it would meet the ends of justice if the remaining sentence of the petitioner was reduced to that already undergone.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment, dated 18-10-2001 passed by the Lahore High Court, Lahore, in Criminal Appeal No.255 of 1999).
S.5(2)
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.161
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)
Sentence, reduction in
Contentions of the accused were that he had suffered loss of service on account of his conviction and sentence; that he had faced protracted criminal trial and other proceedings for over a period of 10 years and had already served actual imprisonment for more than one year and that only 2 or 3 months were left for the expiry of his sentence of 1-1/2 years and that it would serve the interest of justice if the sentence of the accused was reduced to that already undergone by him
Accused in fact, had suffered an agony of protracted trial and subsequent criminal proceedings for over a period of 10 years and stated to have already served out the sentence for more than one year besides he had also lost his service
Ends of justice would be met if the sentence of the accused was reduced from 1-1/2 years R.I. to that already undergone. Abdul Rauf Farooqi, Advocate Supreme Court for the State. ORDER
Judgment & Decree
FAQIR MUHAMMAD KHOKHAR, J.
This petition is directed against judgment dated 18-10-2001 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore passed in Criminal Appeal No.255 of 1999.
2. A criminal case F. I. R., No. 14, Exh.P.C. dated 12-7-1993 under, section 161, P.P.C. read with section 5(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 was registered at Police Station, Anti-Corruption Establishment, Sargodha, at the instance of Muhammad Nawaz, P.W.1. According to the prosecution case, the complainant approached the petitioner for obtaining a copy of Khasra Girdawari, in respect of the land of his son-in-law Muhammad Mumtaz, who demanded Rs.1,000 as illegal gratification. The complainant did not (sic) police Inspector, Naveed Anwar, P.W.2 made an application Exh.P.W. to the District Magistrate for deputing a Magistrate to supervise the raid which was allowed by order dated Exh.P.D./1. The Magistrate recorded the statement of complainant, Exh.P.E. The complainant also handed over the currency notes of Rs.1,000 to the Magistrate with denomination of one currency no of Rs.500 and five currency notes of Rs.100 each P.1 to P.6. The Magistrate returned the same to the complainant after taking down their numbers. The tainted currency notes P.1. to P.6 and copy of Khasra Girdawari Exh.P.D. were recovered from the pocket of the petitioner pursuant to a raid conducted by the police under the supervision of the Magistrate. The raiding Magistrate recorded the statement of .the petitioner, handed over his custody to the police alongwith the raid proceedings and report for further necessary action and investigation.
3. After investigation of the case and obtaining sanction for prosecution Exh.P.J. the petitioner was challaned to face the trial. The petitioner denied the charge. The prosecution in all examined four P.Ws., tendered the documents Exhs. P.A. to P.N. in evidence. The petitioner was examined by the Court of Special Judge, Anti-Corruption Sargodha, under section 342, Cr.P.C. The petitioner also tendered, documents mutation Exh.D.A. and a copy of Roznamcha Exh.D.B. in evidence. The trial Court found the petitioner guilty of the charge under section 161, P.P.C. read with section 5(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947, convicted and sentenced him to suffer 3 years R.I. and fine of Rs.2,000 and in case of non-payment of fine to further suffer 9 months R.I. The benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C. was also given to the petitioner. The petitioner filed a Criminal Appeal No.255 of 1999 which was dismissed by Lahore High Court, Lahore by the impugned judgment dated 18-10-2001. However, the High Court reduced the sentence of the petitioner from 3 years to 1-1/2 years. Hence this petition for leave to appeal. 3-A. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner on 10-1-2003, we issued a notice to the Advocate General only on the question of quantum of sentence. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner had suffered loss of service on account of his conviction and sentence. He had also faced protracted criminal trial A and other proceedings for over a period of 10 years. He had already served actual imprisonment for more than one year and only 2 or 3 months were left for the expiry of his sentence of 1-1/2 years. It would serve the interest of justice if the sentence of the petitioner was reduced to that already undergone by him.
4. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of Advocate General, Punjab, to be fair to him, frankly stated that it would meet the ends of justice if the remaining sentence of the petitioner was reduced to that already undergone.
5. We have heard both the learned counsel at some length. The petitioner has suffered an agony of protracted trial and subsequent criminal proceedings for over a period of 10 years. He is stated to have already served out the sentence for more than one year. Besides, he has also lost his service. In the circumstances, it will meet the ends of justice if the sentence of the petitioner is reduced from 1-1/2 years R.I. to that already undergone by him.
6. For the foregoing reasons this petition is dismissed with the direction that the conviction of the petitioner shall stand but his sentence is reduced from 1-1/2 years R.I. to that already undergone by him. The petitioner shall be released from jail forthwith on payment of fine of Rs.2,000 unless required in arty other case. M.B.A./M-808/S Order accordingly.