Pakistan Case Law
1985 SCMR 893

NOOR HUSSAIN vs MUHAMMAD SALIM

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation1985 SCMR 893
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Criminal Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No.18 of 1980 Criminal Appeal
Date1984-01-09
Judge(s)Aslam Riaz Hussain, Muhammad Afzal Zullah Nasim Hasan Shah and Shafiur Rahman
Authored byAslam Riaz Hussain
ResultPetition dismissed
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

This matter concerns a petition for leave to appeal filed by the complainant against the acquittal of respondents who were initially convicted by the trial court for offences under sections 302, 148, and 149 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, but subsequently acquitted by the High Court. The core legal question addressed by the Supreme Court was whether a one-day delay in filing the petition for leave to appeal should be condoned, given the petitioner's failure to provide a satisfactory explanation for the delay caused by the Advocate-on-Record. The Court held that the petition was time-barred and declined to condone the delay. The ratio of the decision emphasizes that where an acquittal has been granted, the respondents acquire valuable rights to life and liberty, which cannot be lightly disturbed, especially when the delay in filing an appeal is not satisfactorily explained, even if the delay is minimal.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Can a one-day delay in filing a petition for leave to appeal against an acquittal be condoned without a satisfactory explanation?
  • Does an acquittal judgment confer a valuable right to life and liberty upon the respondents that warrants strict adherence to limitation periods?
Laws & provisions referred
  • Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
  • Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
  • Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
acquittalleave to appealcondonation of delaylimitationcriminal appealright to liberty

ORDER

ASLAM RIAZ HUSSAIN, J.--This is a petition for leave to appeal against acquittal of the respondents who were tried for offences under section 302/148/149, P.P.C., by the learned trial Court which convicted them for the said offences and sentenced Muhammad Salim son of Muhammad Ramzan, to death and a fine of Rs.5,000 or in default R.I. For five years, while it sentenced the remaining respondents to imprison--ment for life and a fine of Rs.3,000 each or in default further R.I. For one year each under section 302/149, P.P.C. It also sentenced all of them under section 148/149 to 2 years, R.I. Each. The convicts filed an appeal before the High Court which acquitted all of them vide the impugned judgment.

2. Noor Hussain complainant has filed the present petition for leave to appeal against their acquittal. The petition is, however, barred by the by one day. The petitioner's counsel has not been able to explain the delay satisfactorily It appears that the learned Advocate-on Record neglected to file the petition promptly after obtaining the copy of the A impugned judgment. Notwithstanding the fact that the delay is only of one day, we do not consider it a fit case for condonation of the delay as Muhammad Salim son of Muhammad Ramzan (respondent No.1) has acquired the right to live, while others have acquired the valuable right of liberty.

The petition is, therefore, dismissed as barred by the.

Cited by 6 cases

For educational and research use only — not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.