2017 P Cr (PLP)
Mir NAZEER AHMED — Applicant Versus The STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2017 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Sindh (Hyderabad Bench) |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | Mir NAZEER AHMED — Applicant Versus The STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | (a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2017 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: (a) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2017 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Sindh (Hyderabad Bench) bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2017 P Cr (PLP) (Mir NAZEER AHMED — Applicant Versus The STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Headnotes / Summary
S. 426
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 392 & 411
Robbery, dishonestly receiving stolen property
Short sentence
No objection was raised by the prosecution
Accused was admitted to bail accordingly. [Para. 2 of the judgment]
S. 439
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 392 & 411
Robbery, dishonestly receiving stolen property
Scope
Accused was convicted and sentenced to suffer R.I. for two years under S. 411, Penal Code, 1860
Criminal appeal filed by the convict was dismissed
Contention was that courts below had not properly appreciated the evidence on record as there were material contradictions in the evidence and prosecution had failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt against convict, as such, judgments of two courts below were not legal and proper
Points raised required consideration
Revision application against conviction was admitted. [Para. 2 of the judgment]
Judgment & Decree
ANWAR HUSSAIN, J.
Counsel for the Applicant undertakes to comply with the Office Objections Nos.1 to 4, within one week and Office Objection No.5, is deferred for the time being.
2. The Applicant Mir Nazeer Ahmed was tried, convicted and sentenced to suffer R.I for two years for offence under section 411 and to pay fine of Rs.20,000/-, in default thereof, shall suffer S.I. for four months. However, benefit of section 382, Cr.P.C., has been extended to the Applicant vide Judgment dated 05.3.2016, passed by learned 4th Judicial Magistrate, Tando Muhammad Khan. Thereafter, Criminal Appeal No.5 of 2016, filed by Applicant was dismissed vide Impugned Final Order dated 11.6.2016, passed by learned Sessions Judge Tando Muhammad Khan. It is, inter alia, contended that the Courts below have not properly appreciated the evidence on record as there are material contradictions in the evidence and the Prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt against the Applicant, as such, the Judgments of two Courts below are not legal and proper. The points raised requires consideration. This Criminal Revision Application against Conviction is admitted. Call R&Ps. The learned Counsel for the Applicant submits that the sentence is short one and while relying on the cases of Abdul Hameed reported in 1999 SCMR 2589, and Adnan A. Khowaja reported in 1439, prays for the suspension of the sentence and release of the Applicant on bail during pendency of this Revision Application. He further contended that the Applicant was on bail during trial as well as before the Appellate Court. Mr. Iram Ahmed, D.D.P.P. for the State is already on notice and raised no objection if the sentence of the Applicant is suspended. Keeping in view the above position and no objection raised by the learned D.D.P.P. for the State and the fact that the sentence awarded to the Applicant is short one, the Applicant is admitted on bail subject to furnishing solvent surety in the sum of Rs.50,000/- with PR bond in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Additional Registrar of this Court. The Application stands disposed of. WA/M-123/Sindh Bail granted.