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

MUHAMMAD versus S. D. M. & TRIBUNAL, MIRPUR SAKRO


Gold was not announced by customs officials at the airport for the punishment, reduction in Germany, of a foreigner traveling from Abu Dhabi to Iran, Customs Act 1969 section 156 (1) (8). He purchased his income-saving income, which if he had no friends or relatives in Pakistan and his sentence could not be reduced, he could lose the job of the Abu Dhabi petitioner and he would have his There is a better record and this is his first offense, which has reduced his sentence. Basis, in circumstances [punishment]

1983 P Cr. L J 441

[Karachi]

Before Sajjad Ali Shah, J

MOHIM DEHVERY‑Appellant

Versus

THE STATE Respondent

Special Criminal Appeal No. 7 of 1982, decided on Ist :September, 1982.

Customs Act (IV of 1969)‑

‑‑ S. 156(1) (8)‑Sentence, reduction of‑Accused a foreign national, on way to Iran from Abu Dhabi apprehended by Custom authorities at K Airport with gold not declared by him ---Accused admitting guilt and gold with him found to have been purchased by him from savings of his income‑Petitioner having no friend or relative in Pakistan and in case his sentence not reduced, he may lose his job at Abu Dhabi‑Petitioner having good record of his carrier and this being his first offence‑Sentence reduced on compassionate grounds, in circumstances.‑[Sentence].

Sabir Ansari for Appellant.

Mrs. Salima Nasiruddin for the State.

Date of hearing : Ist September, 1982.

JUDGMENT

Appellant is convicted for an. offence under section 156(1) (8) of the Customs Act and has been sentenced to S. I. for 4 months and a fine of Its. 50,000 and in default S. I. for four months more.

2. Appellant has pleaded guilty before the trial Court hence he was awarded lenient sentence. He has filed this appeal for reduction of sentence. According to the learned counsel appellant is a foreign national and is an Iranian. He was serving in Abu Dhabi and after serving for five years he purchased the gold in question from his savings and was carrying it to his country Iran. Appellant had to stop in Karachi and while in transit was apprehended because he failed to declare the gold which was in his possession. Since the appellant has pleaded guilty the scope of this appeal is limited and is narrowed down only to e consider the question of reduction of sentence. Mr. Ansari has submitted that appellant has already suffered a lot and the gold purchased by him against receipts from his savings has been confiscated. The gold recovered from him is 180 tolas which is roughly valued at Rs. 3 lacs. It is further submitted that appellant is not in a position to pay up the fine of Rs. 50,000 which has been imposed on him as he is a totally stranger in the country and has no friends or relatives. It is further stated that this is the first offence committed by the appellant otherwise he has a very good record. Appellant at the time of his arrest was on his way to Iran as he had taken leave and was going to visit his parents after a period of 5 years while he was in. service in Abu Dhabi. It is further submitted that if the sentence is not reduced the appellant might lose his job. The learned counsel has cited before me in P L D 1977 Kar. 1049, in which guidelines are laid down with regard to the plea of guilt and further that the plea of guilt is to be regarded as a mitigating factor when it comes to passing a sentence. In the reported case after plea of guilt sentence of R. I. of six months was reduced to three months. In another decision reported in 1976 P Cr. L J 166, property worth of Rs. 2 crores was smuggled into Pakistan and appellants were sentenced to R. I. for six years and a fine of Rs. 2 lacs each. In appeal the sentence was reduced to 2 years and a fine of Rs. 10,000 each. In another decision reported fin 1978 P Cr. L J 633, 20 kilos of charas was smuggled into the country and the trial Court sentenced the appellant till rising of the Court and a fine of Rs. 14,000, which was reduced to Rs. 10,000 in appeal.

3. Keeping in view compassionate grounds as stated above the sentence of the appellant is hereby reduced from 4 months' S. I. to .2 B months' S. I. and fine is reduced from Rs. 50,000 to Rs. 10,000 and In default of payment of fine he would suffer S. I. for one month more.

4. In the result, appeal is allowed to the extent stated above.

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
best law firm from Chunian 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.