Find a Lawyer

Every Lawyer listed in this directory is verified by SJP verification Team

✓ Free WhatsApp lawyer help
Need to speak to a lawyer now?

Chat with us free on WhatsApp — tell us your city and legal matter and our team connects you with the right lawyer. No form, no fee.

💬 Instant WhatsApp chat ⚖ Verified lawyer directory ⏰ Replies in minutes

versus


O XXVI, r 2 Special Appeal to Appeal for Virtual Proceedings Delay for 30 days due to invalid belief of Advocate Clerk was not delayed

1968 S C M R 1424

Present : Hamoodur Rahman, Muhammad Yaqub Ali and Abdus Sattar, JJ

QUTAB DIN AND ANOTHER‑Petitioners

versus

THE STATE‑Respondent

Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 198 of 1968; decided on 14th October 1968.

(On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of West Pakistan, Lahore, dated the 18th March 1968, in. Criminal Appeal No. 511 of 1966).

Supreme Court Rules, 1956---

--- O. XXVI, r. 2 Petition for Special Leave to Appeal in criminal proceedings‑Limitation

30 days‑Delay of 5 days because of mistaken belief of clerk of Advocate as regards period of limitation‑Delay not condoned Petition dismissed.

Jari Ullah Khan, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by, Abdul Karim, Attorney for Petitioners.

Nemo for the State.

Date of hearing : 14th October 1968.

ORDER

HAMOODUR RAHMAN, J.

‑The petitioners in this case were convicted under sections 452/34, 307/3‑1 and 302/34, of the Pakistan Penal Code and were sentenced to rigorous imprison ment for 5 years on each of the first two counts and for transportation for life under section 302/34, P. P. C. Some fine was also imposed in addition to the rigorous imprisonment on, the first two counts. Their convictions and sentences under section 302/34, P. P. C. have been upheld by the High Court of West Pakistan but their convictions under section 307/34 have been altered to convictions under section 323/34, P. P. C. and the sentences have been reduced to one year from 5 years. Similarly the sentences of the petitioners under section 452/34, P. P. C. have been reduced to two years from 5 years.

The petitioners now seek special leave to appeal but, unfortunately, their petition is out of time by some 5 days and the only explanation of the delay furnished by the clerk of the learned Advocate of the petitioners is that he was under a mistaken belief that the limitation for filing the aforesaid petition was 60 days and not 30 days, as provided in the rules of this Court.

This explanation cannot be accepted. In any event, the mistake of a clerk of a learned lawyer cannot be a sufficient' ground for condoning delay.

This petition is, accordingly, dismissed as being barred by time.

Petition dismissed

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.

🔍 Find a Lawyer
Popular cities: Lahore· Karachi· Islamabad· Rawalpindi· Multan· Faisalabad
divorce advocates from Jampur lawyer

SJP Lawyers DirectorySJP Lawyers Directory

Pakistan's leading legal-technology platform and verified lawyer directory — connecting clients, lawyers, law firms and Bar Associations across the country.

Get in Touch

© 2018–2027 SJP Legnocrats (SMC-Private) Limited. All rights reserved.
Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes
👋 Need a lawyer? Chat with us free on WhatsApp now.