1989 PLP 3966 (MLD)
SYED HUSSAIN SHAH‑‑Appellant Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1989 PLP 3966 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Abdul Majeed Tiwana, J |
| Parties | SYED HUSSAIN SHAH‑‑Appellant Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 PLP 3966 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1989 PLP 3966 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Abdul Majeed Tiwana, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 PLP 3966 (MLD) (SYED HUSSAIN SHAH‑‑Appellant Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Sardar Faiz Muhammad Khan Khosa for Appellant.
- Date of hearing: 6th June, 1989.
Headnotes / Summary
West Pakistan Arms Ordinance (XX of 1965)‑ ‑‑‑S.13‑‑Sentence, legality of‑‑Accused was tried, convicted and sentenced by Sessions Judge‑‑Offence exclusively triable by Magistrate First Class Entire proceedings against accused were without jurisdiction and without lawful authority‑‑Conviction and sentence was set aside in circumstances. Muhammad Aslam v. State 1980 P Cr. L J 314 ref. Nemo for the State.
Judgment & Decree
Sadiq Hussain Shah appellant was convicted under section 13 of the Arms Ordinance, 1965 and sentenced to one year R.I. by Mr.Sarfraz Ahmad Khan, Sessions Judge, Layyah, for having been found in possession of an un‑licensed revolver when on 7‑7‑1985, being in Police custody in murder case, led to its recovery.
2. The learned counsel for the appellant with reference to the authority (Muhammad Amir Maui, JI .. known as Muhammad Aslam v. State (1980 P.Cr. LJ 314) submits that the trial, conviction and sentence of the appellant under section 13 of the Arms Ordinance, 1965, by the learned Sessions Judge was illegal because this offence was exclusively triable by a Magistrate Ist Class. Agreeing with the contention of the learned counsel based on the aforesaid authority, I hold that the entire proceedings taken against the appellant were without jurisdiction and without lawful authority. The appeal is therefore accepted, the conviction and sentence of the appellant are set aside, and he is acquitted. SA./S‑545/L Appeal allowed.