1985 P Cr (PLP)
MUHAMMAD AMIR‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1985 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Munir Khan, J |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD AMIR‑‑Petitioner 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) (MUHAMMAD AMIR‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Qazi Muhammad Saleem for Petitioner.
- Date of hearing: 26th January, 1985.
Headnotes / Summary
S.411‑‑Sentence‑‑Accused not a previous convict‑‑Continuously in jail for 9 months‑‑Sentence of two years reduced to already under gone.‑‑[Sentence]. Nasim Iqbal for the State.
Judgment & Decree
S.411‑‑Sentence‑‑Accused not a previous convict‑‑Continuously in jail for 9 months‑‑Sentence of two years reduced to already under gone.‑‑[Sentence]. Qazi Muhammad Saleem for Petitioner. Nasim Iqbal for the State. Date of hearing: 26th January, 1985. The facts giving rise to this revision are that Muhammad Amir petitioner was tried under section 411, P.P.C. by Magistrate Ist Class, Toba Tek Singh who convicted and sentenced him to 2 years' R.I. on 30‑11‑1983. The appeal of the petitioner failed on 18‑3‑1984, hence this revision 2. The learned counsel has not challenged the conviction. He requests for leniency in sentence. The learned counsel for the State has, however, opposed this request. 3. I have considered the submissions made by the parties with care. In the circumstances of the case that the appellant is not a previous convict and that he is continuously in jail since 18‑3‑1984, I h am of the opinion that the sentence already undergone .by him would meet the case. He shall be released forthwith, if not required in any other case. Order accordingly. M. A. K. Order accordingly.