2004 PLP 810 (SCMR)
ABDUL HAQ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD AMIN alias MANNA and others‑‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 2004 PLP 810 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry and Khalil-ur‑Rehman Ramday, JJ |
| Parties | ABDUL HAQ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD AMIN alias MANNA and others‑‑‑Respondents |
| Primary Law | (b) Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2004 PLP 810 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: (b) Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2004 PLP 810 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry and Khalil-ur‑Rehman Ramday, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2004 PLP 810 (SCMR) (ABDUL HAQ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD AMIN alias MANNA and others‑‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- S. Zahid Hussain Bokhari, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner.
- Date of hearing: 27th May, 2002.
- Salma Malik, A.A.‑G. with M.A. Qureshi, Advocate‑on‑Record for the State.
- 2. We are informed by the learned counsel for petitioner that convict/respondent No.1, after serving the entire period of his sentence awarded to him by the learned High Court vide judgment dated 2nd March, 1999 has been released from custody.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment/order dated 2‑3‑1999 passed by Lahore High Court in Writ Petition No.415 of 1995). (a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)‑ ‑‑‑‑Ss. 302/452‑‑‑Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S.403‑‑ Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Arts‑13 & 185(3)‑‑‑Death sentence altered to life imprisonment by High Court‑‑‑Accused after serving entire period of sentence had been released from custody‑‑‑If now accused was vexed with another sentence for same offence, then same would be unfair, unjust and violative of Art.13 of the Constitution read with S.403, Cr.P.C.‑‑‑Supreme Court dismissed petition and declined leave. Mst. Razia Begum v. Jehangir and others PLD 1982 SC 302; Mst. Promilla and others v. Safeer Alam and others 2000 SCMR 1166 and Amir Khan and others v. The State and others 2002 SCMR 403 rel. ‑‑‑‑Art. 13‑‑‑Accused once‑having served out substantial legal sentence for an offence could not be awarded another sentence for same offence. Mst. Razia Begum v. Jehangir and others PLD 1982 SC 302; Mst. Promilla and others v. .Safeer Alam and others 2000 SCMR 1166 and Amir Khan and others v. The State and others 2002 SCMR 403 rel. Salma Malik, A.A.‑G. with M.A. Qureshi, Advocate‑on‑Record for the State.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑‑‑Art. 13‑‑‑Accused once‑having served out substantial legal sentence for an offence could not be awarded another sentence for same offence. Mst. Razia Begum v. Jehangir and others PLD 1982 SC 302; Mst. Promilla and others v. .Safeer Alam and others 2000 SCMR 1166 and Amir Khan and others v. The State and others 2002 SCMR 403 rel. S. Zahid Hussain Bokhari, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner. Salma Malik, A.A.‑G. with M.A. Qureshi, Advocate‑on‑Record for the State. Date of hearing: 27th May, 2002. IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, J.‑‑‑This petition for leave to appeal has been filed against the judgment dated 2nd March, 1999 passed by Lahore High. Court, Lahore whereby death sentence awarded to respondent No. l by the trial Court vide judgment dated 1st July, 1992 under sections 302/452, P.P.C. has been altered to imprisonment for life with benefit of section 382‑B Cr.P.C.
2. We are informed by the learned counsel for petitioner that convict/respondent No.1, after serving the entire period of his sentence awarded to him by the learned High Court vide judgment dated 2nd March, 1999 has been released from custody.
3. We have pointed' out to learned counsel that in view of judgments reported in Mst. Razia Begum v. Jehangir and others PLD 1982 SC 302, Mst. Promilla and others v. Safeer Alam and others 2000 SCMR 1166 and Amir Khan and others v. The State and others 2002 SCMR 403 whether an accused, who had served out the substantial/legal sentence, can be awarded another sentence for the same offence and it would not be in violation of the provisions of Article 13 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan. The learned counsel stated that the respondent No.1 was not awarded legal sentence by the High Court in exercise of writ jurisdiction because alternate remedy was available to him. But in our opinion this objection of the learned counsel is only of academic nature at this stage for the reasons noted above because this Court in above noted judgments has held that if an accused has served out the substantial/legal sentence for an offence, he cannot be awarded another sentence for the same offence. Additionally it may be added that it would be unfair, unjust and would also be in violation of Article 13 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan read with section 403, Cr.P.C., if now accused/convicts are vexed with another sentence for the same offence. Thus for the foregoing reasons, petition stands dismissed and leave declined. S.A.K./A‑294/S Leave refused.