1985 P Cr (PLP)
Mst. KANEEZ BEGUM‑‑Appellant Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent.
| Citation | 1985 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Munir Khan, J |
| Parties | Mst. KANEEZ BEGUM‑‑Appellant Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent. |
| Primary Law | Penal Code (XLV of 1860)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1985 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 1985 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Muhammad Munir Khan, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1985 P Cr (PLP) (Mst. KANEEZ BEGUM‑‑Appellant Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent.). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Sardar Muhammad Latif Khosa for Appellant.
- Dates of hearing: 14th and 28th October, 1984.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑Ss. 468/109 & 471‑‑Conviction not challenged‑‑Leniency in sentence sought on ground that after conviction, parties had entered into compromise on basis of which disputed property was inherited by parties according to Muslim Law‑‑Sentence of imprisonment set aside till rising of Court and amount of fine reduced from Rs.2,000 to Rs.1,000 on each count‑‑Finding in case however, shall not affect civil rights of parties in any manner. Ashraf Khan for the State.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑‑Ss. 468/109 & 471‑‑Conviction not challenged‑‑Leniency in sentence sought on ground that after conviction, parties had entered into compromise on basis of which disputed property was inherited by parties according to Muslim Law‑‑Sentence of imprisonment set aside till rising of Court and amount of fine reduced from Rs.2,000 to Rs.1,000 on each count‑‑Finding in case however, shall not affect civil rights of parties in any manner. Sardar Muhammad Latif Khosa for Appellant. Ashraf Khan for the State. Dates of hearing: 14th and 28th October, 1984. This criminal appeal arises from the judgment of the learned Additional Special Judge Anti‑Corruption, Lahore whereby he on 2‑9‑1979 convicted Kaneez Begum under sections 468/109 and 471, P.P.C. and sentenced her to imprisonment till rising of Court and a fine of Rs.2,000 in default thereof to further R.I. for six months.
2. The learned counsel has not challenged the conviction and rightly so because there is ample evidence on the record to prove crime committed by the appellant. Learned counsel has requested for leniency in sentence. The learned counsel while requesting for leniency in sentence submitted that after the conviction of the appellant, the parties had entered into compromise on the basis of which consent decree was passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Sialkot on 3‑9‑1981 whereby the property of Siraj Din the predecessor‑in‑interest was inherited by the parties according to Muslim Law. In the circumstances that the parties have entered into a compromise as stated by the learned counsel, I feel inclined to set aside the conviction of imprisonment till rising of the Court and reduce the sentence of fine Rs.2,000 on each count to l Rs.1,000 on each count. The finding in the case shall not affect the civil rights of the parties in any manner. The appellant shall deposit Rs.2,000 with the trial Court within a month failing which the trial Court shall issue warrants for her arrest and detention. A. A. Appeal partly accepted.