Find a Lawyer

Writ Petition No. 3727 of 1978, decided on 30th October, 1978.

Martial Law Order, 1977 1C. M. L. A.'sl‑

‑‑ No. 5‑Sentence ‑ Sentence of rigorous imprisonment ‑ Can be combined only with whipping and/or forfeiture of property but, held, cannot be combined with fine.‑[Sentence].

Q. M. Salim for Petitioner.

Rashid Aziz, A. A. G. for Respondent.

Date of hearing: 29th October, 1978.

The petitioner, Manzoor was found guilty under section 304‑A, P. P. C. by the Summary Military Court, who sentenced him to six months' R. I. and to pay a fine of Rs. 3,000. It is admitted that the term of the sentence of the petitioner has already expired but he has not been released on account of non‑payment of the amount of.fine.

2. The learned counsel has challenged the validity of the impugned order only insofar as it imposes fine of Rs. 3,000 upon the petitioner. He contends, while placing reliance upon Martial Law Order No. 5, that sentence of rigorous imprisonment cannot be combined with fine and it 'can be combined only with whipping and/or forfeiture of property.

I have already taken view in some cases that sentence of rigorous imprisonment can be combined only with whipping and/or forfeiture of property and it cannot be combined with fine. In the present case, the sentence of rigorous imprisonment has been combined with fine, which is not warranted by law.

3. As a result of the above discussion the sentence of fine passed against the petitioner being not sustainable in law is hereby set aside and the writ petition is partly accepted, without any order as to costs. If the petitioner has undergone the term of rigorous imprisonment and is being detained only on account of non‑payment of fine, then he will be released forthwith, if not required in any other case.

Find a Lawyer Near You

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