Find a Lawyer

Criminal Revision No. 95 of 1952 decided on 7th April 1952, by the District Magistrate, Shahpur, under section 341, Criminal Procedure Code.

S. 341‑Deaf‑mute capable of understanding proceedings‑Magistrate after con viction referring case to High Court‑ Case returned to Magis trate for passing suitable sentence.

Where from the observations made by the Magistrate that the accused a deaf‑mute, could understand the nature of the act imputed to him, that he pleaded not guilty and that, by making gestures he admitted his pervious conviction, it appeared that the accused was capable of understanding the proceedings held against him, the case was returned by the High Court to the Magistrate concerned for passing a suitable sentence against the accused.

Cr. Rev. No. 1421 of 1932; and Cr. Rev. No. 771 of 1947 rel.

Jamil Asghar, for the Advocate‑General, for Petitioner, (Crown).

Nemo, for Respondent.

(Order, dated the 8th January 1952, passed by Mian "Muhammad Ishaq; Magistrate 1st Class, with section 30 powers at Sargodha) :‑

I have today convicted an unknown deaf‑mute under section 379/75 Pakistan P. C. The name, parentage or other particulars of this deaf and dumb were not given in the challan and could not be ascertained by me. I also tried to find out if the accused had any friends or relatives who are accustomed to communicate with him in the ordinary affairs of life but without any success. The accused could not be made to understand the proceedings but nevertheless during trial I gathered that he had sufficient intelligence to understand the criminal character of his act. The conduct of the accused at the time of his arrest and during trial and keeping in view his previous history indicated that the possibility of some other clever persons utilizing this deaf‑mute in the perpetration of crimes is not excluded.

After convicting the accused the proceedings have been stayed under section 341 Criminal Procedure Code. The proceedings and the above report may now be forwarded to the High Court under the said section to pass such orders thereon as it thinks fit.

‑Mian Muhammad Ishaq, Magistrate 1st Class with section 30 powers at Sargodha has convicted a man, who is deaf and dumb, under section 379/75 Pakistan P. C. His name and address could not be ascertained owing to his disabilities but he is alleged to have been caught red -handed. by Ali Muhammad (P. W. 1) from whose pocket he is., said to have picked three currency notes of Rs. 10 each. Two foot constables arrived at the scene of the crime and took him to the police station where at report was made by Ali Muhammad and the accused was formally arrested. The prosecution case was supported by Allah Din (P. W. 2) and Noor Muhammad (P. W. 3) besides the complainant himself The learned Magistrate has recorded in his judgment that when questioned by the Court the accused shook his head to indicate that he was not guilty of the offence with which he was charged and made gestures suggesting admission of his previous conviction. In the opinion of the learned Magistrate the accused was sufficiently intelligent to understand the nature of the criminal act imputed to him and he was, therefore, convicted under section 379 read with section 75 Pakistan P. C. But, in view of section 341 Criminal Procedure Code, no sentence was passed against him and the case was referred to this Court for order. From the observations made by the learned Magistrate that the accused could understand the nature of the act imputed to him, that he pleaded not guilty and that, by making gestures he admitted his previous conviction, it appears that the accused was capable of under standing the proceedings held against him. There is, therefore, no reason why the Magistrate should not proceed to pass the sentence which he may consider appropriate. Two precedents have been brought to my notice. One of them is Criminal Revision No. 1421 of 1932 in which it was pointed' out to the Additional District Magistrate that the provisions of section 341, Code of Criminal Procedure, relate to cases where the accused cannot be made to understand the proceedings. The Additional District Magistrate had made a note that the accused was intelligent enough to understand case against him. The record was returned to him with the direction to complete the judgment by sentencing the accused. The other case is Criminal Revision No. 771 of 1947. In that case also the accused was deaf and dumb but the Committing Magistrate and reported that, as far as he could see, the accused was capable of understanding the purport of the evidence against him. The Magistrate was directed to commit the accused for trial to the Court of Session. Following the precedents mentioned above I return the record of the case to the Court of Mr. Muhammad Ishaq, Magistrate 1st Class with section 30 powers at Sargodha, with the direction that he should complete his judgment by passing a suitable sentence against the accused.

A. H. Case returned.

Find a Lawyer Near You

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