1994 PLP 2053 (MLD)
TAHIR LODHI alias SHAHEEN — Appellant Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 1994 PLP 2053 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Mian Abdul Khaliq, J |
| Parties | TAHIR LODHI alias SHAHEEN — Appellant Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | West Pakistan Arms Ordinance (XX of 1965) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1994 PLP 2053 (MLD)?
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 1994 PLP 2053 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Mian Abdul Khaliq, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1994 PLP 2053 (MLD) (TAHIR LODHI alias SHAHEEN — Appellant Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Taqi Ahmad Khan for Appellant.
- Date of hearing: 28th March, 1994.
Headnotes / Summary
S.13
Suppression of Terrorist Activities (Special Courts) Act (XV of 1975), S.5
Trial in absentia-Accused had been tried, convicted and sentenced in absentia by the Special Court which was not warranted by law and had caused grave miscarriage of justice
Conviction and sentence of accused were consequently set aside and case was remanded to Special Court to conduct de novo trial right from the point of framing charge against him. Zia Ullah Khan and others v. Government of Punjab and others PLD 1989 Lah. 554 and Government of Punjab through Secretary, Home Department v. Zia Ullah Khan and 2 others 1992 SCMR 602 ref. Nemo for the State.
Judgment & Decree
Tahir Lodhi alias Shaheen son of Babu Ramzan was tried by the learned judge, Special Court (Suppression of Terrorist Activities), Gujranwala Division, Gujranwala, who vide his impugned judgment dated 29-10-1990 convicted the appellant under section 13 of the West Pakistan Arms Ordinance (XX of 1965), and sentenced him to undergo 4 years' R.I. The appellant has come up in appeal to assail his conviction and sentence.
2. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record. The learned counsel for the appellant has pointed out that the appellant was tried, convicted and sentenced in absentia, which is not warranted by law. In this respect he referred to Zia Ullah Khan and others v. Government of Punjab and others PLD 1989 Lah. 554 and Government of Punjab through Secretary, Home Department v. Zia Ullah Khan and 2 others 1992 SCMR 602.
3. In view of the abovementioned inherent lacuna and legal defect in the trial, we have no doubt that the trial Court had not proceeded in accordance with law thereby causing grave miscarriage of justice. we therefore, set aside the conviction and sentence of the appellant and remand the case to the learned Judge/Presiding Officer, Special Court for Suppression of Terrorist Activities), Gujranwala Division, Gujranwala constituted under the Special Courts Act, 1975, who shall conduct the trial de novo right from the point of framing charge against the accused. The accused shall be considered as undertrial by the trial Court from his date of arrest. In these terms the present appeal is disposed of. N.H.Q./T-83/L??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Case remanded.