REHMAT ALI Alias LUNDA vs The STATE
This matter concerns a petition for leave to appeal filed before the Supreme Court of Pakistan, challenging a High Court judgment that had upheld the petitioner's convictions under sections 458 and 307 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The core legal question was whether the time spent pursuing an inadmissible review petition in the High Court could be excluded from the period of limitation for filing a petition for leave to appeal before the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court held that the petition was hopelessly time-barred and dismissed it. The Court reasoned that review proceedings are not admissible in criminal matters under the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. Consequently, the filing of an incompetent review petition cannot serve as a valid basis to extend the limitation period or create a fresh starting point for filing an appeal. The Court condemned the practice of filing such review petitions as a ruse to circumvent statutory limitation periods, establishing that time spent on legally impermissible proceedings does not toll the limitation period for subsequent appeals.
- Is a review petition admissible in criminal proceedings under the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898?
- Can the time spent pursuing an incompetent review petition be excluded from the limitation period for filing a petition for leave to appeal?
- Does the dismissal of an inadmissible review petition create a fresh starting point for the limitation period for an appeal?
- Section 458, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 307, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
1. SAJJAD AHMAD, J.-This petition is barred by 47 days. The petitioner filed his revision in the High Court against his convic--tions and sentences under sections 458 and 307, P. P. C. Which was dismissed on the 30th of December 1970. He then applied for a review of the High Court's judgment passed in revision. The review application was not pressed, as the learned counsel appearing for him admitted that it was not maintainable. The review petition was, therefore, dismissed on the 15th of February 1971.
2. The present petition for leave to appeal was filed on the 25th of March 1971.. The petitioner claims the exclusion of time, which was spent by him for obtaining a copy of the judgment of the High Court made in his review application, claiming further that the date of the disposal of his review petition gives him the starting point of limitation for the present petition for leave to appeal.
3. Review is not admissible in criminal proceedings under the Code of Criminal Procedure. It seems that, by filing a review petition and getting it dismissed, the petitioner merely resorted to a ruse to create a fresh starting point for himself for coming to this Court. Such an exercise must be condemned.
4. This petition being hopelessly time-barred, is dismissed' as such. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.
Cited by 10 cases
- BARKAT ALI Versus Mst. DADULI 2017 PCrLJN 211
- SAJJAD HUSSAIN and another vs The STATE and another 2014 MLD 400
- ZEESHAN AHMED vs THE STATE and anothers 2012 P Cr. L J 700
- FAISAL Versus State 2007 PLD 544
- MUHAMMAD ALI HUSSAIN vs DISTRICT POLICE OFFICER and others 2006 PLD Lahore 95
- ABDUL FATTAH BABAR SANI vs Mst. NOREEN and 2 others 2000 P Cr. L J 1516
- Mst. MUMTAZ BEGUM and 8 others vs SHAKIL HYDER and 12 others 1997 P Cr. L J 776
- SIRAJUDDIN And Another vs THE STATE and 7 others- 1991 P Cr. L J 2338
- RAHIM JAN vs AHMAD JAN Andanother 1986 P Cr. L J 122
- JEWAN AND 9 OTHERS vs THE STATE 1980 P Cr. L J 570