Pakistan Case LawMUHARRAM ALI Versus THE STATE
This matter concerns a petition for leave to appeal against an order of the Lahore High Court, which had upheld the petitioner's conviction under section 13 of the Arms Ordinance 1965 and section 5 of the Explosive Substances Act 1908. The petitioner had been originally sentenced to five years of rigorous imprisonment for the arms offense and ten years for the explosive substances offense, with the sentences running concurrently. On appeal, the High Court maintained the convictions but reduced the sentence for the explosive substances offense to seven years and the fine to Rs. 5,000, while granting the benefit of section 382-B of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. Upon review, the Supreme Court found the reduced sentence of seven years for the explosive substances offense to be excessive. Consequently, the Court converted the petition into an appeal and further reduced the sentence for the explosive substances offense to five years of rigorous imprisonment. The key principle affirmed is the appellate court's authority to exercise discretion in mitigating sentences deemed disproportionate or excessive relative to the offense.
- Can the Supreme Court reduce a sentence imposed by the High Court if it deems the punishment excessive?
- Does the appellate court have the authority to modify the quantum of sentence while maintaining the conviction?
ORDER
MANZOOR HUSSAIN SIAL, J.---Muhammad Ali petitioner, seeks leave to appeal from order dated 19-10-1993, passed by the Lahore High Court, Lahore in Criminal Appeal No, 427 of 1991.
2.The petitioner was convicted by the Special Court No, IV (Suppression of Terrorist Activities), Lahore, on 18-3-1991, under section 13 of the Arms Ordinance (XX of 1965) and sentenced to R.I. For 5 years and fine of Rs,30,000. He was also convicted under section 5 of the Explosive Substances Act, 1908, and sentenced to R.I. For 10 years. The sentences were ordered to run concurrently. He was, however, granted the benefit of the provisions of section 382-B, Cr.P.C.
3.On appeal, the High Court vide impugned order dated 19-10-1993, maintained the conviction of the petitioner but reduced the sentences of 10 years to R.I. For 7 years awarded to him under section 5 of the Explosive Substances Act, 1908. The amount of fine was also reduced to Rs,5,000. The benefit of the provisions of section 382-B, Cr.P.C. Was also allowed.
4.After hearing the learned counsel for petitioner as well as learned counsel for the State, we are of the view that sentence imposed upon the petitioner under section 5 of the Explosive Substances Act, is rather excessive, we, therefore, convert this petition into appeal and allow the same to the extent that the sentence of 7 years awarded by the High Court is further reduced to R.I. For five years. This appeal in terms indicated above is disposed of.
Sentence reduced.
Judges on this bench
- Saad Saood Jan2,559 judgments
- Muhammad Rafiq Tarar605 judgments
- Manzoor Hussain Sial807 judgments