KHALID SHARIF vs THE STATE
This criminal petition arises out of a conviction and sentence under section 6(1)(a) and (c) read with section 23 of the West Pakistan Pure Food Ordinance, 1960, for storing adulterated Atta containing less than the prescribed percentage of Gluton. The petitioner's conviction and sentence were upheld by the Additional Sessions Judge on appeal and subsequently maintained by the High Court of Sind and Baluchistan in revision. The petitioner challenged the findings before the Supreme Court, raising new contentions regarding the legal appointment of the Public Analyst and the potential deterioration of the sample due to the damp climate of Karachi. The Supreme Court held that since these points were never raised before the High Court, they could not be permitted to be raised for the first time before the apex court. Consequently, the Supreme Court dismissed the petition, finding no substance in it, and directed the petitioner to surrender to his bail bond to serve the remainder of his sentence.
- Can a new contention not raised before the High Court be permitted to be raised for the first time before the Supreme Court?
- Does the storage of Atta containing less Gluton than prescribed constitute an offence under the West Pakistan Pure Food Ordinance, 1960?
- Section 6(1)(a), West Pakistan Pure Food Ordinance 1960
- Section 6(1)(c), West Pakistan Pure Food Ordinance 1960
- Section 23, West Pakistan Pure Food Ordinance 1960
ORDER
1. ' SALAHUDNIN AHMED, J.-The petitioner was convicted and sentenced under section 6 (1) (a) and
(c) read with section 23 of the West Pakistan Pure Food Ordinance, 1960. On appeal the learned Additional Sessions Judge maintained the conviction but reduced the sentence. The conviction and sentence has been maintained by the High Court of Sind & Baluchistan in revision.
2. ' The prosecution case was that the petitioner was found to have stored in his shop for sale Atta' in which Gluton was 1 per cent less than required under the rules framed under the said Ordinance.
3. Under the rules the Atta should have contained 8 per cent Gluton. The Public Analyst, however, found that it was 1 per cent less. The seizure of the Atta from the shop of the petitioner is not challenged. The High Court concurred in the findings of the two Courts holding the petitioner guilty.
4. ' On behalf of the petitioner the following contentions were raised before us:-
(1) The Public Analyst was not legally appointed.
(2) Since the analysis was done 7 days after the taking of samples the Atta deteriorated due to damp climate of Karachi.
5. These points were never raised before the High Court and cannot be permitted to be raised.
6. ' There is no substance in the petition and it is, accordingly, dismissed. The petitioner shall now surrender to his bail bond and serve out the remainder of the sentence of imprisonment imposed on him.
Cited by 2 cases
- PAKCOM LIMITED and others vs FEDERATION OF PAKISTAN and others 2011 PLD Supreme Court 44
- MUHAMMAD YOUSAF HAROON, SENIOR CIVIL JUDGE A.J.K JUDICIARY vs COMPETENT AUTHORITY FOR JUDICIAL OFFICERS, DEPARTMENT_CHIEF JUSTICE AJ&K, MUZAFFARABAD & 4 others 2014 PLJ Tr.C. (Services) 163