2010 P Cr (PLP)
IMTIAZ — Appellant/Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2010 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Ch. Iftikhar Hussain and Muhammad Anwaarul Haq, JJ |
| Parties | IMTIAZ — Appellant/Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2010 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2010 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Ch. Iftikhar Hussain and Muhammad Anwaarul Haq, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2010 P Cr (PLP) (IMTIAZ — Appellant/Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Mian Pervaiz Hussain for Appellant/Applicant.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 426
Control of Narcotic Substances Act (XXV of 1997), S.9(c)
Application for
Applicant/accused had prayed for suspension of his sentence
Trial Court in impugned judgment had observed that extreme penalty of death was not awarded to accused, because, he was neither owner nor driver of the truck, but just a helper of the truck; that co-accused had not been arrested by the Police; and that accused was very poor person and not in a position to purchase such a huge quantity of Charas himself
Such observations of the Trial Court had rendered the case of accused to be the one requiring reappraisal of the evidence on record to see that, if he, in such circumstances, could be convicted under the said offence or that his conviction and sentence could be maintained
Accused was arrested on 14-5-2007 and since then he was continuously suffering detention
No likelihood was in the sight that an early hearing of his appeal would be possible
Sentence of accused was suspended, in circumstances. Chaudhry Jamshaid Hussain, Deputy Prosecutor-General for the State.
Judgment & Decree
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 1 of 2010. Applicant Imtiaz by way of the instant application has prayed for suspension of his sentence and admitting him to bail pending disposal of his appeal.
2. He, vide the judgment rendered on 24-9-2009, by Malik Mubeen Ahmad, the learned Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge Anti-Narcotics, Sheikhupura, in case F.I.R. No.467 registered with Police Station Sadar, Sheikhupura on 14-5-2007, has been convicted under section 9(c) of the Act supra and sentenced to life imprisonment with fine of Rs.50,000 and in default thereof to further suffer six months' SI. The benefit under section 382-B, Cr.P.C. has been extended to him.
3. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the impugned judgment, we would like to reproduce herein below para 16 of the impugned judgment: Extreme penalty of death is not awarded to accused because:- (i) He is neither owner nor driver of the truck but just a helper of the truck. (ii) Co-accused have not been arrested by the police. (iii) He is very poor person and not in a position to purchase such a huge quantity of charas himself.
4. These observations of the learned trial Court have rendered his case requiring reappraisal of the evidence on record to see that if he in such circumstances, could be convicted under the said offence or that his conviction and sentence can be maintained. The learned Deputy Prosecutor-General, when confronted with this position, he has not been able to given any satisfactory answer to the same.
5. According to his learned counsel, he has been arrested in this case on 14-5-2007 and since then is continuously suffering detention till date. There is no likelihood of early hearing of his appeal in the near future.
6. We, therefore, in such circumstances, accept this petition and suspend his sentence and admit him to bail pending disposal of his appeal subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs. 300,000 (Rupees three hundred thousand only) with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court. H.B.T./I-45/L Sentence suspende