1986 P Cr (PLP)
MUHAMMAD BUX Appellant Versus THE STATE Respondent
| Citation | 1986 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | Ally Madad Shah, J |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD BUX 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 Karachi bench comprising: Ally Madad Shah, 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 BUX Appellant Versus THE STATE Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- G.M. Soomro for Appellant.
- Date of hearing: 21st August, 1984.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑S. 409‑‑Prevention of Corruption Act (II of 1947), S. 5(2)‑‑Appeal‑ Sentence‑‑Appeal not pressed on merits but stress made on taking lenient view with regard to sentence‑‑Appeal filed for last four year& and remaining pending since then‑‑Duration of period of prosecutor hanging over head of accused since long‑‑Sentence of imprisonment reduced to one already undergone.‑‑[Sentence]. Zawar Hussain Jafferi, A.A.‑G. for the State.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑‑S. 409‑‑Prevention of Corruption Act (II of 1947), S. 5(2)‑‑Appeal‑ Sentence‑‑Appeal not pressed on merits but stress made on taking lenient view with regard to sentence‑‑Appeal filed for last four year& and remaining pending since then‑‑Duration of period of prosecutor hanging over head of accused since long‑‑Sentence of imprisonment reduced to one already undergone.‑‑[Sentence]. G.M. Soomro for Appellant. Zawar Hussain Jafferi, A.A.‑G. for the State. Date of hearing: 21st August, 1984. Appellant Muhammad Bux has preferred this appeal against hip conviction for an offence punishable under section 409, P.P.C. read with section 5(2) of Act II of 1947 and sentence therefore of rigorous imprisonment for one year and fine Rs.8,000 or rigorous imprisonment for one year more in default awarded by the learned Special Judge, Anti‑Corruption, Sukkur by Judgment, dated 16‑9‑1980. The learned counsel for the appellant does not press the appeal on merits but he submits that lenient view may be taken in awarding sentence and fine may be imposed in lieu .of un expired portion of substantive sentence of imprisonment on considering the duration of the case which was instituted in the year 1975. The learned A.A.‑G. concedes in principle to the consideration for leniency in sentence. The appellant is alleged to have misappropriated Government money to the tune of Rs.8,000 when he was recovery Tapedar in the year 1975. The case was registered against him on 22‑5‑1976 and it was decided on 16‑9‑1980. This appeal was filed on 23‑9‑1980 and hash remained pending since then. Considering the duration of the peril of prosecution hanging over the head of the appellant since 1976, the A sentence awarded on the appellant is reduced to the imprisonment already undergone with fine Rs.10,000 or rigorous imprisonment for one year in default. The counsel for the appellant requests for 1i, months time for payment of the fine. The fine shall be paid within 1i months. With modification of the sentence as aforesaid, the appeal stands dismissed. M.Y.H Appeal partly accepted.