Lawyers Directory Listing
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.
Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 59‑D of 1969, decided on 9th December 1969.
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of East Pakistan, Dacca, dated the 27th May 1969, in Criminal Appeal No. 462 of 1966).
---Ss. 410 & 423‑ Criminal appeal‑‑Counsel for appellant not pressing appeal on merits but praying merely for reduction of sentence‑‑High Court, in circumstance, not considering appeal on merits but otherwise reducing sentence as prayed for‑‑Whether High Court relieved of its duty to consider criminal appeal on merits even if it is pressed only on ground of sentence‑Special Leave to Appeal granted by Supreme Court to consider question.
Farid‑Ahmed, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by S. M. Huq, Attorney for Petitioners.
Nemo for the State,
Date of hearing: 9th December 1969.
‑The petitioner No. 1 was convicted under section 325 of the Pakistan Penal Code and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for 5 years. All the five petitioners including petitioner No. 1 were convicted under section 147 of the Pakistan Penal Code and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for one year, each. The sentences of the petitioner No. 1 on two counts were to run concurrently. The petitioners preferred an appeal to the High Court against their convictions an sentences. Mr. Akrain Hossain Amin, Advocate represented the petitioners in the criminal appeal in the High Court. It appears from the judgment of the High Court that Mr. Akram Hossain Amin did not press the appeal on merits, but prayed only for reduction of sentences of the petitioners. On this prayer, the learned Judges of the High Court did not really consider the appeal on merits, but reduced the sentences of petitioner No. 1 to the period of sentence already undergone by him and the sentence of each of the remaining petitioners under section 147 of the Pakistan Penal Code was reduced from one year to six months' rigorous imprisonment.
It is alleged in paragraph 10 of the special leave petition that the petitioners had instructed their Advocate to press the appeal on merits, but this not having been done they are aggrieved by the judgment of the High Court. In a similar case, we already granted leave to consider if the High Court is relieved of its duty to consider a criminal appeal on merits if it is pressed only on the ground of sentence. Leave is, accordingly, granted in this case also.
The petitioners Nos. 2 to 5 who are already on bail shall continue to remain on bail till the disposal of the appeal.
Leave granted
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer