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

ABDUL RAUF versus STATE


Pakistan Penal Code Section 409/114 Corruption Prevention Act (II of 1947), Section 5 (2) Criminal Procedure Code (V9 1898), Correction of typographical error in section 561A decision was filed by affidavit That the sentence of imprisonment. As per the statement stated in the judgment, Hs 1,500 and Rs 3,000 were converted into fines, the statement was not contradicted by the state prosecutor, no reason, was held, does not exist, the operative of the judgment. The part was corrected accordingly.

1985 M L D 1069

[Lahore]

Before Muhammad Munir Khan, J

ABDUL RAUF--Petitioner

versus.

THE STATE--Respondent

Criminal Miscellaneous No. 678/A1 of 1984 in Criminal Appeal No. 836 of 1978, decided on 11th February, 1985.

Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--

---S. 409/114--Prevention of Corruption Act (II of 1947), S. 5(2)- Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 561-A--Correction of typographical mistake in judgment--Affidavit having been filed by counsel that sentence of imprisonment was altered to fine of Hs.1,500 and not Rs. 3,000 as mentioned in judgment--Statement not controverted by counsel appearing on behalf of State--No reason, held, existed to disbelieve statement of counsel made at bar--Operative part of judgment corrected accordingly.

Sh. Khurshid Ahmad for Petitioner.

Malik Rehmat Khan Awan for the State.

ORDER

Through this petition Abdur Rauf petitioner wants me to amend clerical mistake in my judgment dated 16-9-1984 which shows fine of Rs.300 was imposed on the petitioner/ appellant therein.

2. The learned counsel submits that in fact sentence of one years R.I. was altered to a fine of Rs. 1,500 and not Rs. 3,000 as mentioned in the judgment. He has given affidavit to this effect. Malik Rehmat A Khan Awan, the learned counsel who had represented the State on 16-9-1984 does not controvert the statement made by the learned Counsel for the petitioner at but-. I do not see any reason to disbelieve them. It is, therefore, directed that the operative part of the judgment date 16-9-1984 be read as follows:-

"The sentence of one year R.1 is altered to a fine of Rs. 1,500 in default thereof to further R.I for six months. The sentence of fine, of Rs.500 already awarded by the trial Court is maintained. The petitioner shall deposit Rs. 2,000 in the trial Court."

Within one month from today. Criminal Miscellaneous stands disposed of.

S. A.

Order accordingly.

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
law websites from Jhand 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.