P L D 2007 Karachi 277 (PLP)
ATHAR NAEEM alias WAQAS CHAUDHRY — Appellant Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | P L D 2007 Karachi 277 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | ATHAR NAEEM alias WAQAS CHAUDHRY — Appellant Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in P L D 2007 Karachi 277 (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Anti-Terrorism Act (XXVII of 1997) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case P L D 2007 Karachi 277 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: P L D 2007 Karachi 277 (PLP) (ATHAR NAEEM alias WAQAS CHAUDHRY — Appellant Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Headnotes / Summary
Ss. 7(e) & 25
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.365-A
Limitation Act (IX of 1908). S.5
Appeal, in the present case, against judgment of Anti-Terrorism Court which was to be filed within 7 days from date of judgment, as per S.25 of Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997, was barred by 105 days
Appellant had filed application under S.5 of Limitation Act, 1908 for condonation of said delay
No provision existed in Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 which could authorize the Court to invoke provisions of S.5 of Limitation Act, 1908
Time provided under Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 for filing appeal was different from the time provided in the Schedule attached to Limitation Act, 1908 for filing such appeal
Section 5 of Limitation Act, 1908, being not applicable to the case, delay in filing appeal could not be condoned by invoking section 5, Limitation Act, 1908
Appeal being time barred, stood dismissed.
Judgment & Decree
RAHMAT HUSSAIN JAFFERI, J.
On 28-8-2006 the appellant filed appeal through Superintendent Prison to challenge his conviction , and sentence awarded to him by the learned Judge Anti-Terrorism Court No.1, Karachi, vide judgment dated 5-5-2006. The Office has raised objection that the appeal is time barred by 105 days. On the said objection we have heard appellant in person and A.A.-G. for the State. We have also called report from the Superintendent Jail to inquire whether or not the Prison Rule 90 pertaining to informing the appellant to file the appeal was compiled with to which he has sent a letter dated 12-2-2007 stating that the rule was complied with, as the appellant was informed that he could file appeal if he intended to do so but the appellant replied that his relatives would file the appeal. Apparently the appeal is time barred by 105 days as the appeal is required to be filed within a period of 7 days from the date of judgment as per section 25 of the Anti-Terrorism Act, .1997. The appellant has also filed application under section 5 of the Limitation Act, for condoning the delay. Section 5 of Limitation Act, would be applicable subject to provision 29 of the said Act, which provides that if a time is provided under any statute for filing appeal etc, which is different from the time mentioned in the Schedule attached to the Limitation Act, then the section 5 would not be applicable unless it is made applicable by the statute under which the appeal is filed. In the present case, there is no provision in the Anti-Terrorism Act, which can auhorize the Court to invoke the provisions of section 5 of the Limitation Act. The time provided under the Anti-Terrorism Act for filing the appeal is different from the time provided in the Schedule attached to the Limitation Act for filing such appeal. Thus, section 5 would not be applicable; hence the delay cannot be condoned by invoking section 5 of the Limitation Act. Consequently, the appeal is time barred, which stands dismissed. H.B.T./A-23/K Appeal dismissed.