1985 PLP 647 (MLD)
ABDUL GHAFFAR — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 1985 PLP 647 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Ijaz Nisar, J |
| Parties | ABDUL GHAFFAR — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | (a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1985 PLP 647 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: (a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1985 PLP 647 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Ijaz Nisar, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1985 PLP 647 (MLD) (ABDUL GHAFFAR — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Mian Mushtaq Hussain for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 410--West Pakistan Arms Ordinance (XX of 1965), S.13--Application for condonation of delay in filing appeal against conviction under Arms Ordinance--Accused under impression that he was only convicted under S. 302/323/34, Penal Code, in which his sentence was suspended--Accused when approaching Jail authorities knowing that he was also convicted under Arms Ordinance--Application for condonation of delay granted in circumstances. (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)-:
S. 426--West Pakistan Arms Ordinance (XX of 1965), S. 13- Suspension of sentence--Sentence of life imprisonment awarded to accused under S.302/a23/34, Penal Cole suspended and accused ordered to be released on bail in criminal appeal filed by him--Period of imprisonment awarded to him under Arms Ordinance being short, its operation also suspended and accused admitted to bail. Aziz Qureshi for the State.
Judgment & Decree
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 64-M of 1984 Learned counsel submits that inadvertently the appeal could not be filed as the petitioner was under the impression that he has been convicted under sections 302 and 323/34, P.P.C. only but when his sentence was suspended and he approached the jail authority he learnt that he had also been convicted under the Arms Ordinance. Hence he has submitted an application for condonation, of delay in filing the appeal.
2. The application is granted.
3. As regards the application for suspension of sentence, it is stated that the petitioner's sentence of life imprisonment has since been suspended and he has been ordered to be released on bail in Criminal Appeal No. 122 of 1983.
4. As the period of imprisonment is short, I suspend its operation and admit the petitioner/appellant to bail in the sum of Rs.7,000 (Seven thousand) with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of A.C. Sahiwal in the case under Arms Ordinance.
5. Appeal shall come up alongwith Criminal Appeal No. 122 of 1983. M.Y.H. Sentence suspended.