MUHAMMAD RASHID Versus STATE
This appeal arose from the conviction of the appellant and three others under Section 392 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, for which they were sentenced to seven years' rigorous imprisonment. The appellant challenged his conviction before the Federal Shariat Court, which dismissed the appeal in limine on the grounds that it was time-barred by 538 days. The appellant subsequently filed a petition for leave to appeal before the Supreme Court. The core legal question was whether the Federal Shariat Court correctly dismissed the appeal as time-barred in the absence of any application for condonation of delay or supporting affidavit. Upon review, the Supreme Court found that the appeal was indeed significantly delayed by approximately one year and nine months, and no valid explanation or supporting affidavit had been provided to justify this delay. Consequently, the Supreme Court upheld the dismissal of the appeal by the Federal Shariat Court, holding that in the absence of a proper application for condonation of delay, the appellate court cannot proceed to examine the merits of a time-barred appeal.
- Can an appellate court examine the merits of an appeal that is barred by limitation without an application for condonation of delay?
- Is an appellate court justified in dismissing an appeal in limine when it is filed significantly beyond the statutory period of limitation without explanation?
- Section 17, Offences Against Property (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance 1979
- Section 392, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 382-B, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
MUHAMMAD MUNIR KHAN, J.‑‑‑ This appeal, by leave of the Court, arises from the facts that Muhammad Rashid appellant and three others were tried under section 17 of the Offences Against Property (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979, by the Additional Sessions Judge, Gujrat (Camp at Kharian), who, on 13‑2‑1991, convicted all the accused under section 392, P.P.C. and sentenced them to 7 years' R.I. each and a fire of Rs.10,000 each or six months' S.I. each. Benefit of provisions of section 382‑B, Cr.P.C. was given to the accused. The appeal filed by Muhammad Rashid appellant against his conviction and sentence was dismissed by the Federal Shariat Court on 14‑10‑1992 as barred by 538 days. Feeling aggrieved thereby, he filed petition for leave to appeal through Jail in this Court which was granted on 1‑9‑1993.
2. Ch. Muhammad Akram, Advocate, counsel for the appellant is absent. No one has appeared for the State. Since the appeal cannot and should not be dismissed in default, so we have considered this appeal carefully. We find that Federal Shariat Court has dismissed the appeal in limine as barred by time neither any application for condonation of delay was moved before the Federal Shariat Court nor any affidavit explaining the delay was annexed with the Jail Appeal. In the Petition filed before this Court, the delay has been explained in paragraph 2 of the Memorandum of Petition/Appeal, which reads as under:‑‑---
3. Again, no affidavit in support of this explanation has been filed in the Supreme Court. There is nothing on the record to show as to when the appeal was filed by the appellant against his conviction and sentence in the High Court and whether the same has been disposed of or not. The appeal before the Federal Shariat Court was hopelessly barred by about one year and nine months. We do not see any valid explanation for such long delay in the filing of the appeal. Since the Federal Shariat Court has not given its view on merits and rightly so, because after holding the appeal barred by time, the Federal Shariat Court could not have gone into the merits of the case, it is not possible for us to examine the merits of the case.
4. For what has been said above, there being no merit, the appeal is dismissed.
N.H.Q./M‑3071/S Appeal dismissed.
Cited by 2 cases
- MEHARBAN and 2 others vs THE STATE 2011 P Cr. L J 8
- Meharban and others vs The State