Find a Lawyer

Criminal Petition No. 153 of 1984, decided on 4th June, 1984.

(Against the judgment of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, dated 9-4-1984, passed in Criminal Appeal No.589 of 1969).

---Art. 185(3)--Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.366 376--Offence committed as far back as 1968--Conviction of accused by Magistrate in 1969--Appeal by accused filed before High Court in 1969, kept on pending and decided on 9th April, 1984 (after 15 years) maintaining conviction of accused and sentence--Leave to appeal--Supreme Court considering case to be old and to avoid further delay, converted petition into appeal and disposed same as such.

---Art.185(3)--Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.366 & 376--Offence committed as far back as 1968--Conviction of accused by Magistrate in 1969--Appeal by accused filed before High Court in 1969, kept on pending and decided in April, 1984 maintaining conviction and sentence of accused--Appeal before Supreme Court--Appellant did not have much to urge before Supreme Court and Supreme Court did not find it to be a fit case for setting aside his conviction, but considering that about 16 years had passed since commission of offence, and both persons involved were married and each of them had a number of grown up children, allowed appeal to the extent that sentence of imprisonment was reduced to that already undergone--Petitioner being a)ready on bail, his bail bond stood discharged.--[Sentence].

A.G. Chaudhry, Advocate Supreme Court with Sh. Masud Akhtar, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner.

Mian Nusratullah, Advocate Supreme Court for the State.

Date of hearing: 4th June, 1984.

Shahid petitioner was tried for offences under section 366/376, P.P.C. committed by him as far back as 1968, in relation' to Mst. Nasim Akhtar, prosecutrix. He was convicted and sentenced for the said offences by the learned trial Magistrate by his judgment, dated 31-7-1969. He filed an appeal before the 'High Court in the same year 1969 but the case, somehow, kept pending and was not fixed till 9th April, 1984, i.e. after about 15 years. The High Court maintained his conviction and sentence vice the impugned judgment.

Hence the present petition.

2. We issued notice to the State and Mian Nusratullah, Advocate appeared in compliance thereto on behalf of the State.

Considering that it is a very old case we do not wish to delay it any further, therefore, we convert it into appeal and proceed to dispose of it as such.

3. We have heard the counsel for the parties. Petitioner's counsel did not have much to urge and we do not think this to be a fit case for setting aside his conviction, but considering that almost 16 years have passed since the commission of the offence, and both the persons involved are married and each of them have 'a number of grown up children, we do not think that it shall serve the ends of justice to send the petitioner back to the jail at this juncture.

We, therefore, allow the appeal to the extent that his sentence of imprisonment is reduced to that already undergone by him. He is already on bail. His bail bonds stand discharged.

M.Z.M. 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.