MLD 2001

2001 PLP 378 (MLD)

KAMRAN‑‑‑Appellant Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent

Jurisdiction / Court
Federal Shariat Court
Decided Date
Criminal Appeal No. 142‑L of 2000, decided on 28th September, 2000.
Honorable Judges
Sardar Muhammad Dogar, J
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2001 PLP 378 (MLD)
Forum / Court Federal Shariat Court
Bench Members Sardar Muhammad Dogar, J
Parties KAMRAN‑‑‑Appellant Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent
Primary Law Penal Code (XLV of 1860)‑‑‑
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2001 PLP 378 (MLD)?

This judgment primarily cites: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2001 PLP 378 (MLD)?

The case was heard and decided by the Federal Shariat Court bench comprising: Sardar Muhammad Dogar, J.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 2001 PLP 378 (MLD) (KAMRAN‑‑‑Appellant Versus THE STATE‑‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

Penal Code (XLV of 1860)‑‑‑

Representation

  • Hasnat Ahmed Khan for Appellant.
  • Date of hearing: 28th September, 2000.

Headnotes / Summary

‑‑‑‑S.377‑‑‑Appreciation of evidence‑‑‑Defence had not brought anything on record to show that complainant had fabricated a false story on account of some annoyance or ill‑will against the accused‑‑‑Injuries according to medical report were present on the person of the victim child and blood had oozed out of his rectum ‑‑‑Shalwar of 'the victim was also‑ found blood stained‑‑‑Accused had not substantiated the plea taken by him in his defence and he even did not make statement under S.340(2), Cr. P.C. ‑‑Conviction of accused was upheld in circumstances‑‑‑Sentence of seven years' R.I. of accused was reduced to three years' I.R. with benefit of 5.382‑B, Cr.P.C. and reduction in fine,. in view of the compromise of the complainant with the accused in the case. Ch. Muhammad Ayub for the State.