Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: MUHAMMAD FAISAL SADIQ VS Respondent: StateHonorable Justice IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRYS.M. Tayyab,Abdul Wahid Ch
2005 S C M R 1733
2005 S C M R 1733
[Supreme Court of Pakistan]
Present: Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry, Faqir Muhammad Khokhar and Falak Sher, JJ
MUHAMMAD FAISAL SADIQ---Petitioner
Versus
THE STATE---Respondent
Criminal Petition No.488-L of 2002, decided on 31st May, 2004.
(On appeal from the judgment dated 7-5-2002 of the Lahore High Court Lahore, passed in Criminal Appeal No. 1770 of 2000).
Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)---
----S. 382-B---Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss.302/109---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185 (3)---Period of detention---Computation---Benefit of S.382-B, Cr.P.C., non-awarding of---Contention of the accused was that no benefit of S.382-B, Cr.P.C. was given to him---Validity---Supreme Court found the accused entitled to the benefit of period during which he remained as under trial prisoner---Petition for leave to appeal was converted into appeal and the benefit of S.382-13, Cr.P.C. was granted to him---Appeal was allowed.
S.M. Tayyab, Senior Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner.
Abdul Wahid Ch., Advocate Supreme Court for Respondent.
Date of hearing: 9th February, 2004.
ORDER
IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, J.--- This petition for leave to appeal has been directed against judgment dated 7-5-2002 of the Lahore High Court.
2. Precisely stating the facts of the case are that vide F.I.R. (Exh.P.D.) lodged by Pervaiz Akhtar (P.W.7) petitioner Muhammad Faisal Sadiq along with co-accused Umar Shahzad were booked for an offence under section 302/109, P.P.C. for committing murder of Muhammad Naseem deceased, on 10-2-2000 within the jurisdiction of Police Station Urban Area, Sargodha. On having registered the case, the petitioner along with the co-accused, was put to trial. The learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Sargodha, vide judgment dated 21-11-2000 found the petitioner guilty of the charge, as such, he was directed to undergo life imprisonment as Tazir under section 302, P.P.C. with further direction to pay compensation of Rs.1,00,000 to the legal heirs of the deceased under section 544-A, Cr.P.C. or in default to undergo further imprisonment for six months. So far as the co-accused Umar Shahzad is concerned, he was acquitted of the charge and the High Court vide impugned judgment maintained the conviction and sentence awarded to the petitioner by the trial Court, as such, the instant petition for leave to appeal.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that he has been instructed not to press this petition on merits but would only request for benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C. as the same had not been extended to him by the trial Court and the High Court.
4. After going through the impugned judgment passed by the learned High Court, we are of the opinion that, under the circumstances of the case, the petitioner was entitled to the benefit of the period during which he remained as under-trial prisoner.
5. Request so made is reasonable. Consequently, we converted this petition into appeal, the same is partly allowed and the petitioner is granted benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C. in the above terms.
M.H./M-180/S Appeal allowed.