Sentences of imprisonment
Sentences of imprisonment legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.
Meaning & Judicial Interpretation: (اردو مفہوم اور قانونی تشریح)
Concurrent running of sentences-Provisions of Ss. 35 & 397 Cr.P.C. widened the scope of discretion the court to direct that sentences of imprisonment or that of life imprisonment awarded at the same trial or at two different trials but successively, shall run con currently
Once the legislation had conferred the said discretion in the court, then in hardship cases, courts were required to seriously take into consideration the same to the benefit of the accused so as to minimize and liquidate hardship treatment
Court of law could not fold up its hands to deny the benefit of Ss.35 & 397, Cr.P.C. to an accused person as denial would amount to ruthless treatment.
"Sentences of imprisonment", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/124952865
Precedents & Case Laws citing "Sentences of imprisonment"
2005 Y L R 1551
ABDUL MAJID — Petitioner Versus THE STATE and another — Respondents
Court: Quetta2006 Y L R 915
ABDUL WAHID — Petitioner Versus THE STATE and another-Respondents
Court: Quetta2002 M L D 1040
MUHAMMAD MANSHA and another — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent
Court: Lahore1983 P Cr
ABDUL RASHEED‑Appellant Versus THE STATE‑Respondent
Court: KarachiP L D 1979 Lahore 340
Syed MUZAFFAR HUSSAIN SHAH AND ANOTHER-Petitioners Versus SUPERINTENDENT, CENTRAL JAIL, SAHIWAL AND ANOTHER-Respondents .
Court: S. 401 read with Punjab Government Notification No. 14(2)-. O.-Pre-11, (HD)/70, dated 5-I-1972-Remission of sentence-Conditions of eligibility to avail of remission under notification Different from those as mentioned in relevant provisions of Jail Manual-Notification hence to be examined independently of provisions of Jail Manual.-Sentence-Notification-Jail manual.2013 S C M R 583
AHMAD and another — Appellants Versus SHAFIQ-UR-REHMAN and another — Respondents
Court: Supreme Court of PakistanP L D 1950 Baghdad ulJadid 23
MUNSHI RAM‑‑‑Petitioner Versus CROWN‑‑Respondent
Court:P L D 1980 Karachi 164
Mst. MAI DHAYANI-Petitioner Versus THE HOME SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF SIND, KARACHI AND ANOTHER-Respondents Constitutional Petitions Nos. D-20 and D-61 of 1.979, decided on 11th March; 1979.
Court: S. 57 as amended by Law Reforms Ordinance (XII of 1972)Retrospectivity of statutes-Law Reforms Ordinance-Not retrospective in operation-No sentence of "imprisonment for life" could be awarded in respect of offences committed before coming into force of Law Reforms Ordinance-Nor can a sentence of transportation for life awarded before enforcement of Ordinance be construed as a sentence of "imprisonment for life" as defined in amended S. 57 of Penal Code.-Interpretation of statutes.1995 S C M R 1525
MUHAMMAD RAFIQ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent
Court: Supreme Court of Pakistan