QASIM ALI vs State S — 2022 PLD 694 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

QASIM ALI VS State S. 9(b)---Probation of Offenders Ordinance (XLV of 1960), S. 8---Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S.412---Possession of narcotics---Appreciation of evidence---No appeal in certain cases when accused pleaded guilty---Scope---Accused was booked in the case on recovery of 680 grams of charas from his possession---Record showed that no such perversity in the findings of conviction/sentence recorded by the Trial Court was found which could warrant interference therein, as the recovery of contraband was established, the chain of safe custody remained intact and the Forensic Science Agency Report was also supporting the prosecution case---Conviction/sentence had been passed on the basis of confession voluntarily made by the accused, therefore, on merits no weakness in the prosecution case was found to justify interference---Even otherwise, under S.412, Cr.P.C. after confession, a sentence could only be challenged "to the extent or legality"---Period of imprisonment for one year and nine months in case under S.9(b), Control of Narcotic Substances Act, 1997, was justified and no illegality was found in the impugned judgment as such---Yet right of appeal granted under S.8 of Probation of Offenders Ordinance, 1960, was obviously to assail any terms of probation that affects the right of accused---Said section dealt with conviction one passed on merits and not on the basis of confession; therefore, legal position would stand as incorporated under S. 412 of Cr.P.C.---When appeal was barred, remedy of revision was available to the affected person---In the present case right to file revision against the conviction passed on the basis of confession would remain available; therefore, appellant can file a revision petition instead of appeal---Court was not precluded to exercise revisional jurisdiction when sitting as a court of appeal and could pass any incidental order except to enhance the sentence---Same was the legal position as set out in S. 8 of the Probation of Offenders Ordinance, 1960---Conviction/sentence of the accused as imposed by the Trial Court was upheld---Appeal was dismissed, in circumstances.

QASIM ALI vs State S — 2022 PLD 694 LAHORE-HIGH-COURT-LAHORE

Case information

Judgment text as reported

Other judgments reported in 2022 PLD