1986 P Cr (PLP)
RAHEEL SAJID Appellant Versus THE STATE Respondent
| Citation | 1986 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Munir Man, J |
| Parties | RAHEEL SAJID Appellant 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 Lahore bench comprising: Muhammad Munir Man, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1986 P Cr (PLP) (RAHEEL SAJID Appellant Versus THE STATE Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- R.A. Awan for Appellant.
- Date of hearing: 12th November, 1984.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑S. 420/468‑‑Illegality in recording of statement of accused under Ss. 342 a 364, Cr.P.C.‑‑Trial Court after recording statement under S.342, Cr.P.C. not giving certificate that examination of accused was taken in its presence‑‑Record containing full and true account of statement of accused‑‑Mandatory provision not complied with‑‑Appeal accepted. Ch. M. Mansha for the State.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑‑S. 420/468‑‑Illegality in recording of statement of accused under Ss. 342 a 364, Cr.P.C.‑‑Trial Court after recording statement under S.342, Cr.P.C. not giving certificate that examination of accused was taken in its presence‑‑Record containing full and true account of statement of accused‑‑Mandatory provision not complied with‑‑Appeal accepted. R.A. Awan for Appellant. Ch. M. Mansha for the State. Date of hearing: 12th November, 1984. This criminal appeal arises from the judgment of learned Special Judge (Central), Anti‑Corruption, Lahore whereby he on 22‑4‑1981 convicted Raheel Sajid appellant under section 420/468, P.P.C. and sentenced him to two years' R.I. and a fine of Rs. 6,000 in default thereof to further R.I. for 4 months.
2. The learned counsel has argued the case on merits. Since after hearing the learned counsel I feel inclined to set aside the conviction and send back the case to the trial Court because of illegality in recording of the statement of the accused under section 342/364, Cr.P.C. I need not enter into the merits of the case. I find that the trial Court after having recorded the statement of the accused under section 342, Cr.P.C. on 1‑4‑1981 did not care to give certificate to the effect that examination of the accused was taken in its presence and hearing and that the record contained full and true account of the statement made by the accused. This, to my mind, is not 'a mere irregularity but clear illegality because the mandatory requirement has not be some With That being the position, there is no option but to set aside to conviction and sentence of the appellant and send back the case to the trial Court for retrial from the stage of recording of the statement of the accused. The trial Court shall record the statement of the accuse person again and give requisite certificate thereon and then decided the case according to law. M . A . K. Appeal accepted