2014 PLP 668 (SCMR)
MUHAMMAD SHARIF — Appellant Versus The STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2014 PLP 668 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Asif Saeed Khan Khosa, Ijaz Ahmed Chaudhry and Gulzar Ahmed, JJ |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD SHARIF — Appellant Versus The STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2014 PLP 668 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2014 PLP 668 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Asif Saeed Khan Khosa, Ijaz Ahmed Chaudhry and Gulzar Ahmed, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2014 PLP 668 (SCMR) (MUHAMMAD SHARIF — Appellant Versus The STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Muhammad Zaman Bhatti, Advocate Supreme Court for Appellant.
- Date of hearing: 10th January, 2014.
Headnotes / Summary
(Against the judgment dated 6-5-2009 passed by this Court in Criminal Appeal No.598 of 2005.)
S. 35
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 302, 342 & 365
Constitution of Pakistan, Art. 188
Supreme Court Rules, 1980, O.XXVI, R. 1
Suo motu review by Supreme Court
Qatl-e-amd, wrongful confinement, kidnapping or abducting with intent secretly and wrongfully to confine person
Multiple offences committed by accused part of the same transaction/incident
Concurrent running of sentences
Scope
Offences of murder, wrongful confinement and abduction were committed by the accused, in the present case, which were part of the same transaction, and, thus, ordinarily sentences passed for such offences ought to have been ordered to run concurrently with each other
Such aspect had escaped the notice of the Supreme Court while deciding appeal of accused
Supreme Court, in suo motu review, ordered that all sentences of imprisonment passed against accused, in such circumstances, should run concurrently with each other. Tahir Iqbal Khattak, Additional Prosecutor-General, Balochistan for the State.
Judgment & Decree
ASIF SAEED KHAN KHOSA, J.
The offences committed by the petitioner in respect of murder, wrongful confinement and abduction were parts of the same transaction and, thus, ordinarily the sentences passed for such offences ought to have been ordered to run concurrently to each other. It appears that in the judgment under review this aspect of the matter had escaped the notice of this Court. The Suo Motu Review is, therefore, allowed and it is ordered that all the sentences of imprisonment passed against the petitioner shall run concurrently to each other. Disposed of. MWA/M-4/SC Review accepted.