Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: MUHAMMAD SIDDIQUE VS Respondent: THE STATE
Court Name: Lahore High Court Judge(s): Muhammad Munir Khan Title: MUHAMMAD SIDDIQUE vs THE STATE Case No.: Criminal Revision No.314 of 1982 Date of Judgment:1991-03-31 Reported As: 1991 P Cr. L J 1758 Result: Order accordingly
JUDGMENT
JUDGMENT Muhammad Siddiq, petitioner, stands convicted under Article 4 of the Prohibition (Enforcement of Hadd) Order, 1979, and sentenced to one year and one month's R.I. And a fine of Rs.1,000 or in default thereof three months' R.1. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner has not challenged the conviction and rightly so because there is ample evidence in proof of the charge against the petitioner. He has only requested for the reduction in sentence. 3. No one has appeared for the State. I have considered the matter carefully. I find that after the rejection of the appeal, the petitioner remained in jail fur about five and a half months before he could be released on bail by this Court in this revision application. The petitioner was sent to jail thrice. In these circumstances, I feel that the agony of protracted trial coupled with the imprisonment suffered by him as an under-trial prisoner and as a convict would meet the case. So the sentence of imprisonment awarded to him is reduced to one already undergone by him. The fine of Rs.1,000 is also remitted. Disposed of accordingly.