1994 PLP 480 (SCMR)
ALTAF HUSSAIN SHAH‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1994 PLP 480 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Shafiur Rahman and Saleem Akhtar, JJ |
| Parties | ALTAF HUSSAIN SHAH‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1994 PLP 480 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1994 PLP 480 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Shafiur Rahman and Saleem Akhtar, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1994 PLP 480 (SCMR) (ALTAF HUSSAIN SHAH‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Rab Nawaz Khan Niaz Advocate Supreme Court and S. Abul Aasim Jaferi, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner. .
- Date of hearing: 24th November, 1993.
- Kh. Muhammad Asghar, Advocate Supreme Court for the State.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the order of the Lahore High Court dated 4‑7‑1993 passed in Cr. M. No.2373‑B of 1993). ‑‑‑‑S. 426‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)‑‑‑Suspension of sentence‑‑‑Statutory period for disposal of appeal had expired but despite the direction given by High Court to the office the appeal had not been disposed of‑‑‑Petition for leave to appeal was converted into an appeal and allowed in circumstances and the accused was admitted to bail accordingly. Kh. Muhammad Asghar, Advocate Supreme Court for the State.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑‑‑S. 426‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)‑‑‑Suspension of sentence‑‑‑Statutory period for disposal of appeal had expired but despite the direction given by High Court to the office the appeal had not been disposed of‑‑‑Petition for leave to appeal was converted into an appeal and allowed in circumstances and the accused was admitted to bail accordingly. Rab Nawaz Khan Niaz Advocate Supreme Court and S. Abul Aasim Jaferi, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner. . Kh. Muhammad Asghar, Advocate Supreme Court for the State. Date of hearing: 24th November, 1993. SALEEM AKHTAR, J.‑‑‑The petitioner seeks leave to appeal against the order of the learned Judge in Chambers of the High Court whereby his petition for suspension of sentence was disposed of by the following order:‑‑ "Earlier the petitioner moved petition for suspension of sentence on the ground that the petitioner was convicted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge vide his judgment dated 27‑6‑1990 and since then his appeal has not been fixed for final hearing and the petitioner is entitled to the grant of bail on statutory ground. Vide my order dated 23‑9‑1992, I directed the office that this old appeal be fixed for final hearing on 28‑10‑1992 at No.l. It appears that the appeal was fixed on that date but it could not be heard. The ‑office is directed to fix the appeal within one month at No.l. With these observations, this petition stands disposed of."
2. Notice was issued to the State and we have heard the learned counsel for the parties. There is no denying the fact that statutory period for disposal of the appeal has passed, but so far the appeal has not been decided. The petitioner was convicted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge by his judgment dated 27‑6‑1990. In spite of the direction given by the High Court the appeal has not been disposed of. In these circumstances, we convert the petition into an appeal and allow it. The petitioner is admitted to bail on furnishing two sureties in the sum of Rs.10,000 each to the satisfaction of the Assistant Commissioner, Bhakkar. N.H.Q./A‑1064/S Sentence suspended.