Find a Lawyer

Criminal Appeal No. 24 of 1967, decided on 14th December 1967.

(On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of West Pakistan, Lahore, dated the 6th May 1965, in Criminal Revision No. 710 of 19621.

Ss. 4 & 5-Conviction under Ss. 4 & 5-Special leave to appeal to Supreme Court-Granted to consider propriety of sentence on ground that raid leading to conviction of appellants had taken place six years back.

Ss. 4 & 5-Sentence-Mitigation-Long time elapsing since conviction and accused already spending one month and 14 days in prison--Sentence of six months reduced to period of imprisonment already undergone by accused.

Ghulam Mujaddad Mirza, Senior Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Wali Muhammad Khawaja, Senior Attorney for Appellants.

Muhammad Ashraf, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Ijaz Ali Attorney for the State.

Date of hearing : 14th December 1967.

-In this case Iqbal Ahmad, appellant, was sentenced under section 4 of the West Pakistan Prevention of Gambling ordinance, 1961 to rigorous imprisonment for six months. The other appellants were convicted under section 5 of the Ordinance and were awarded a similar sentence. On appeal the convictions and sentences of the appellants were upheld though two of their co-convicts Nazeer Ahmad and Zafar Hussain, being College students, were ordered to be released on executing bonds under section 562 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in the sum of Rs. 1,000 each with one surety in the like amount, for maintaining good behaviour and the operation of their sentences was suspended.

There were revision petitions in the High Court of West Pakistan by the convicts, but a learned Single Judge of that Court declined to interfere with the orders passed by the Courts below. Special leave to appeal was granted in this case, to the six appellants, to consider the propriety of the sentence only, on the consideration that the raid which led to the prosecution of the appellants, took place as far back as the 20th of October 1961.

Iqbal Ahmad, out of the appellants, was described as the keeper of the common gaming house in which the other appellant were engaged in gambling Mr. G. M. Mirza has pointed out that if the period, during which the appellants remained on bail after their convictions, be excluded, they have already spent a month and 14 days nearly in prison. In view of the long time that has elapsed since their convictions, the learned counsel suggests that the ends of justice would be met by rudueing their sentences to the terms of imprisonment already undergone by them. We consider that there ought to be some distinction between the case of Iqbal Ahmad who was running the gaming house and the other appellants. We allow the appeal, to the extent of reducing the sentences of the appellants to the period of imprisonment already undergone by them, together with a fine or Rs. 250 in the case of Iqbal Ahmad and a fine of Rs. 50 each, in the case of other appellants if Iqbal Ahmad makes default in the payment of the fine, he will undergo rigorous imprisonment for four months further and if any other appellant makes similar default, he will undergo one month's rigorous imprisonment further.

Appeal accepted.

Find a Lawyer Near You

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