1985 P (PLP)
MUHAMMAD BOOTA Appellant Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1985 P (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Rustam S. Sidhwa, J |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD BOOTA Appellant Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Penal Code (XLV of 1860)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1985 P (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1985 P (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Rustam S. Sidhwa, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1985 P (PLP) (MUHAMMAD BOOTA Appellant Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ch. Mushtaq Ahmad Khan for Appellant.
- Date of hearing: 8th June, 1985.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑S. 193‑‑Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 476‑‑Accused confessing his guilt before trial Court for having made a false statement in his affidavit‑‑Trial Court awarding accused sentence of 4 months' simple imprisonment under S. 193, P.P.C.‑‑Prayer for reduction of sentence made on ground of old age of accused‑‑High Court not finding accused as old as stated‑‑High Court finding that accused had already undergone a little over one month's sentence since date of his conviction‑‑Sentence of 4 months reduced to one already undergone but sentence of fine, of Rs. 500 imposed on accused ordered to continue in circumstances.‑‑[Sentence]. C.M. Latif for A.‑G. for the State.
Judgment & Decree
Ch. Mushtaq Ahmad Khan for Appellant. C.M. Latif for A.‑G. for the State. Date of hearing: 8th June, 1985. This is an appeal by Muhammad Boota, appellant, against the judgment of the learned Sessions Judge, Sialkot convicting him under section 193, P.P.C. and sentencing him to four months simple imprisonment.
2. The appellant was tried under section 193, P.P.C. by the learned Sessions Judge, Sialkot for having made a false statement in his affidavit in support of his transfer application. The appellant was tried summarily under section 476, Cr.P.C. The appellant confessed his guilt and the learned Sessions Judge, Sialkot, accordingly sentenced him to four months' simple imprisonment under section 193, P.P.C.
3. I have heard the arguments of the learned counsel for the appellant and the State. On behalf of the appellant only prayer for the reduction of the sentence of the appellant is made and nothing else. It is alleged that the appellant is an old man and that his sentence be reduced.
4. I have given my anxious consideration to this limited submission made. The appellant is not as old as the learned counsel for the appellant would want me to believe. The appellant has already undergone a little over one month's sentence since the date of his conviction. Taking all circumstances into consideration, I would reduce his sentence to that already undergone, but I would impose on the appellant a fine of Rupees Five Hundred (Its. 500) or in default thereof to undergo three months' simple imprisonment. The fine shall be deposited by the appellant in the Court of the learned Sessions Judge, Sialkot, within a month from the date of this judgment.
5. For the foregoing reasons, this appeal is partly allowed in terms of reduction in sentence and imposition of fine, as stated above. H.A.K Appeal partly accepted