SCMR 2008

2008 PLP 67 (SCMR)

MUHAMMAD ISLAM — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent

Jurisdiction / Court
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Decided Date
Criminal Petition No.303-L of 2006, decided on 13th July, 2006.
Honorable Judges
Khalil-ur-Rehman Ramday and Raja Fayyaz Ahmad, JJ
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 2008 PLP 67 (SCMR)
Forum / Court Supreme Court of Pakistan
Bench Members Khalil-ur-Rehman Ramday and Raja Fayyaz Ahmad, JJ
Parties MUHAMMAD ISLAM — Petitioner 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 2008 PLP 67 (SCMR)?

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

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2008 PLP 67 (SCMR)?

The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Khalil-ur-Rehman Ramday and Raja Fayyaz Ahmad, JJ.

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

Cite this legal precedent as: 2008 PLP 67 (SCMR) (MUHAMMAD ISLAM — Petitioner 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

  • M.A. Zafar, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner.
  • Nemo for Respondent.
  • 2. We have heard the learned Advocate Supreme Court for the petitioner-convict at some length but could not find any infirmity, legal or factual, in the concurrent findings of guilt recorded against the petitioner. The benefit of mitigating circumstances available on record has already been extended to the said convict as he stood punished only with the sentence of imprisonment for life.

Headnotes / Summary

(On appeal from the judgment, dated 2-3-2006 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, passed in Criminal Appeal No.1367 of 2004).

S. 302(b)-Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)

Petitioner was the solitary accused burdened with knife injuries on the person .of the deceased

Concurrent findings of both the Courts below regarding the guilt of accused on the basis of ocular testimony furnished by the complainant and other eye-witness, did not suffer from any legal or factual infirmity

Benefit of mitigating circumstances, available on record, had already been extended to accused, as he stood punished only with the sentence of imprisonment for life

Petition was even otherwise barred by time

Leave to appeal was refused to accused in circumstances.

Judgment & Decree

KHALIL-UR-REHMAN RAMDAY, J.

Islam petitioner was the solitary accused burdened with knife injuries on the person of Asad deceased. It was found by both the learned Courts that the prosecution had successfully proved his guilt through the testimony of Shafi complainant and Ashraf P.W.

2. We have heard the learned Advocate Supreme Court for the petitioner-convict at some length but could not find any infirmity, legal or factual, in the concurrent findings of guilt recorded against the petitioner. The benefit of mitigating circumstances available on record has already been extended to the said convict as he stood punished only with the sentence of imprisonment for life.

3. This petition, which is even otherwise barred by time, is, therefore, dismissed. Leave refused. N.H.Q./M-147/SC Leave refused.