Leave Granting Order of Supreme Court and Suspension of Sentence

Leave Granting Order of Supreme Court and Suspension of Sentence Anti Terrorism Case Laws Constitutional Law Criminal Law Knowledge - Constitutional Law Knowledge - Criminal Law Lahore High Court Litigation & Arbitration Rape Solutions - Constitutional Law Solutions - Criminal Law Suspension of sentence Mrs. Justice Erum Sajad Gull in her judgment has decided the issue regarding leave granting order of Supreme Court and suspension of sentence in Writ Petition No. 39108 of 2015.

1. This writ petition has been moved by the petitioner/convict Adil Mansoor under Section 426 (2-B) of the Code of Criminal Procedure for suspension of his sentences awarded to him by the learned trial court vide judgment dated 30.8.2008 (upheld by this Court vide judgment dated 29.6.2011 while dismissing Crl Appeal No.838/2008 of the petitioner in case FIR No.412 dated 24.5.2007, registered under Sections 376(2)/379/342/148/ 149/337-J PPC and 7 of The Anti-Terrorism Act, 1997 at Police Station Garden Town, Lahore). The petitioner then assailed the judgment of this Court through Criminal Petition No.440/2011 before the August Supreme Court of Pakistan in which leave was granted on 24.1.2013 and the said criminal petition was converted into appeal No.85-L of 2013 which is pending adjudication.

2. The convictions and sentences of the petitioner are as under:

i) Under Section 143 PPC read with section 149 PPC. Six months R.I.

ii) Under Section 337-J/149 PPC. Five years R.I.

iii) Under Section 376 (2) PPC. Fourteen years R.I with fine of Rs.50,000/- and in case of non-payment three months S.I for committing gang rape with PW.5 Shizuka Yazawa.

iv) Under Section 376 (2) PPC. Fourteen years R.I with fine of Rs.50,000/- and in case of non-payment three months S.I for committing gang rape with PW.6 Kei Suheiro.

v) Under Section 347 PPC read with Section 149 PPC. Three years R.I with fine of Rs.10,000/- and in case of non-payment S.I for two months for wrongfully confining P.W.5 Shizuka Yazawa.

vi) Under Section 347 PPC read with 149 PPC. Three years R.I with fine of Rs.10,000/- and in case of non-payment Two months S.I for wrongfully confining P.W.6 Kei Suheiro.

vii) Under Sections 379/149 PPC. Two years R.I for committing theft of mobile phone and Rs.3,000/-

viii) Under Section 7 (i) ATA, 1997. Seven years R.I.

3. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

4. The operative paragraph of the judgment of this Court where the convictions and sentences of the court below were upheld is reproduced as under:

“12. To sum up, after evaluating whole evidence and material available on the file, we have come to the conclusion that prosecution has succeeded in bringing home guilt against the appellants beyond any shadow of doubts whereas the defence miserably failed to point out any illegality, perversity or irregularity in the impugned judgment by pointing out any material from amongst the statements of the prosecution witnesses tending to manifest that contradictions and inconsistencies, fatal for the prosecution case. Thus, we do not find it appropriate to interfere with the well-reasoned judgment of the learned trial court. Consequently, both the appeals are dismissed. Resultantly, conviction and sentences of both the appellants are maintained and upheld.”

5. The leave granting order of the Hon’ble Supreme Court of Pakistan is reproduced as under:

“2. Learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the conviction of the petitioners under Section 376(2) PPC is not tenable in law as there is no medical evidence to corroborate the allegation of rape; that the conviction under Section 7 of the Anti-Terrorism Act cannot be sustained because it was not a case of terrorism and even otherwise, since three of the co-accused were acquitted by the Trial Court, the prosecution case against the petitioners is also no free from doubt.

3. Having heard petitioners’ learned counsel at some length, leave is granted inter alia to consider the issues raised.”

6. Admittedly above mentioned convictions and sentences passed by the trial court against the petitioner were upheld by this Court by repelling the arguments advanced on behalf of the petitioner, therefore, at this stage, this Court further cannot go into these controversies. Reliance is placed on case titled Ahmed Sher alias Sheri Bhatti vs. The State, etc (2014 PSC (Crl.) 411).

Further information regarding leave granting order of Supreme Court and suspension of sentence can be solicited from AUJ LAWYERS. Feel free to contact us in case you need any clarification and/or require legal assistance regarding similar matters.