ORDER SHEET

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SINDH,

CIRCUIT COURT, HYDERABAD.

                                       Cr.Appeal.No.S-   75   of   2017

DATE                       ORDER WITH SIGNATURE OF JUDGE

01.01.2018.

Mr. Nisar Ahmed Durani, Advocate for appellant.

Mr. Shahzado Saleem Nahiyoon, D.P.G. for the State.

                        =

            The medical report received from the Senior Medical Officer Central Prison Hospital, Hyderabad, who has reported as under:-

“It is submitted that Convict Muhammad Pannah is suffering from Begin Tumour of Lipmo (Swelling at Back). He is examined by General Surgeon and advised for excisional surgery at LUH, Hyderabad.

At present he is being treated symptomatically. His health status is stable on prescribed treatment. The exact of this report may be submitted to Honourable Court on time positively.”

            The learned counsel for the appellant submits that it is clearly mentioned in the report that General Surgeon has advised for excisional surgery at LUH, Hyderabad, therefore, he requests that on the advise of General Surgeon, the appellant may be referred to the General Surgeon for surgery as advised by him.

            Learned D.P.G. recorded no objection. Order accordingly.

            The learned D.P.G. has also pointed out that through this appeal, the appellant has challenged the impugned judgment dated 14.03.2017 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge-I, Tando Adam in Sessions Case No.326 of 2009, whereby the appellant has been convicted u/s 392 PPC to suffer RI for five years. He further submits that FIR in this case has been registered u/s 17 (3) Offence Against Property (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979 and the charge against the appellant has been framed under Hudood law, therefore, he requests that appeal filed by the appellant may be referred to Honourable Federal Shariat Court. In support of his contentions, learned D.P.G. placed reliance on the cases reported as Juman and another v. The State (PLD 2016 Sindh 191) and Ali Dino and another v. The State (2017 P.Cr.L.J. 578).

            Learned counsel for the appellant in view of the above circumstances requests that this appeal may be referred to the Federal Shariat Court

            From the perusal of R&Ps it appears that the charge against the appellant was framed u/s 17 (3) Offence Against Property (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979 and appellant has been convicted for five years, therefore, appeal ought to have been filed before the Federal Shariat Court and not before this court in view of the dictum laid down in the cases of Juman and Ali Dino (supra). Accordingly, this appeal before this court is incompetent and the same would lie before Federal Shariat Court, therefore, the Additional Registrar of this court is directed to send this appeal and its record to the Federal Shariat Court.

            This criminal appeal No.S-75 of 2017 stands disposed of in the above terms.   

                                                                                                                  JUDGE

Tufail