2007 PLP 810 (YLR)
SHAH NAWAZ — Appellant Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2007 PLP 810 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | Ali Sain Dino Metlo, J |
| Parties | SHAH NAWAZ — Appellant Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | West Pakistan Arms Ordinance (XX of 1965) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2007 PLP 810 (YLR)?
This judgment primarily cites: West Pakistan Arms Ordinance (XX of 1965) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2007 PLP 810 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: Ali Sain Dino Metlo, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2007 PLP 810 (YLR) (SHAH NAWAZ — Appellant Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Jai Jai Veshno Mangay Ram for Appellant.
- ALI SAIN DINO METLO, J.---1 and 2. Heard Messrs Jai Jai Veshno. Advocate `for applicant and Muhammad Ismail Bhutto, State Counsel. The latter has no objection to the admission of appeal and suspension of sentence.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 13(d)
Accused was sentenced to undergo R.I. for three years and to pay fine
Accused was given benefit of S.382-B, Cr.P.C.
Period of about two and half years, in which accused remained in custody during trial, was ordered to be deducted from his substantive sentence; in that way period for which accused had to remain in jail would come out to be about six or seven months
Appeal was likely to take a long time for its decision on merits
Sentence of accused, in circumstances, was suspended and accused was directed to he released on bail, pending decision of appeal. Muhammad Ismail Bhuttoo State Counsel.
Judgment & Decree
1 and
2. Heard Messrs Jai Jai Veshno. Advocate `for applicant and Muhammad Ismail Bhutto, State Counsel. The latter has no objection to the admission of appeal and suspension of sentence. It is first appeal and entire evidence has to be scrutinized. The appeal is, therefore, admitted for hearing. Call R&Ps and prepare paper book. The appellant has been convicted for the offence punishable under section 13(d) of the Pakistan Arms Ordinance, 1965, and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay fine of Rs.5,000 or in default to undergo simple imprisonment for two months more. However, he was given benefit of section 382-B, of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 and a period of about two and half years, he remained in custody during trial, was ordered to be deducted from the substantive sentence and in this way the period for which he has to remain in jail comes out to be about six or seven months. The appeal is likely to take a long time for its decision on merits. In such circumstances, the sentence is suspended and the appellant is directed to be released on bail on furnishing one surety in the sum of Rs.50,000 and personal bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of Additional Registrar of this Court pending decision of the appeal. H.B.T./S-2/K Sentence suspended.