1982 P Cr (PLP)
HAKIM ALI‑Petitioner Versus SUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL PRISON, KARACHI
| Citation | 1982 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | Mushtak Ali Kazi and Muhammad Zahoorul Haq, JJ |
| Parties | HAKIM ALI‑Petitioner Versus SUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL PRISON, KARACHI |
| Primary Law | Penal Code (XLV of 1860)‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1982 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1982 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: Mushtak Ali Kazi and Muhammad Zahoorul Haq, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1982 P Cr (PLP) (HAKIM ALI‑Petitioner Versus SUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL PRISON, KARACHI). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Nizam Ahmed for Petitioner.
- Date of hearing : 19th June, 1979.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑ Ss. 302 & 380/34‑Sentence, commutation and commencement of --‑Order of Government commuting sentence of death to trans portation for life, held, would take effect from date on which original sentence passed. Muhammad Sharif v. Inspector‑General of Prisons P L D 1978 Lah 15 rel. Abdul Sattar Shaikh, Add]. A.‑G. for the State.
Judgment & Decree
MUSHTAK ALI KAZI, J.‑This is a petition by the convict himself undergoing the sentence of transportation for life for offence under sections 302 and 380/34, P. P. C., Central Prison, Hyderabad praying for release on the ground that he has already served out the sentence and his total imprisonment with remission earned and special remission granted by the Government comes to 20 years and 24 days.
2. The only question for determination in this petition is whether the order, of the Government commuting the sentence of death to transporta tion would take effect from the date of the judgment and sentence or from the date of the order as passed by the executive authority. Whenever a sentence is reduced either by the competent Court in exercise of judicial powers or by any executive authority in exercise of its prerogatives, the reduced sentence shall be deemed to have commenced from the date on which the original sentence was passed. This is also the view taken ill A Muhammad Sharif v. Inspector‑General of Prisons (P L D 1978 Lab. 15). We can see no reason to depart from this principle.
3. The petition is accordingly allowed to the extent mentioned above and the sentence served by the petitioner may be calculated accordingly.
4. A copy of this order may be communicated to the Superintendent Jail, Hyderabad, for immediate necessary action. Petition allowed