P L D 1952 Dacca 192 (PLP)
Petitioners Versus CROWN‑Opposite‑Party
| Citation | P L D 1952 Dacca 192 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | |
| Bench Members | Ispahani and Ibrahim, JJ. |
| Parties | Petitioners Versus CROWN‑Opposite‑Party |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in P L D 1952 Dacca 192 (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case P L D 1952 Dacca 192 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the bench comprising: Ispahani and Ibrahim, JJ..
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: P L D 1952 Dacca 192 (PLP) (Petitioners Versus CROWN‑Opposite‑Party). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Meser Ali and K. Hossain, for Petitioners.
Headnotes / Summary
(a) Penal Code (X LV of 1860), Ss. 71, 148, 324‑Separate sentences for offences under Ss. 148 and 324 legal. Since the amendment of the Criminal Procedure Code in 1923 by which the word "distinct" was deleted from section 35 of the Criminal Procedure Code, separate sentences for rioting and for hurt or grievous hurt, even where the common object of the unlawful assembly is to commit assault, are legal. Fatiar Bap v. The King‑Emperor 31 C W N 691 ; Aftan Khan and others v. Israfil Khan 54 C W N 2 D R 311= P L R 1 Dacca 10 ref. (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 147, 352, 379‑Common object of entire assembly theft‑Common object of only four of the members of assembly also assault‑Assembly not riotous. The common object of the entire assembly was theft, and if assault was a separate object of four of the members of the assembly only and was committed by them in prosecution of that object, it could not render the unlawful assembly riotous. Sultanuddin Ahmed, Deputy Legal Remembrancer, for the Crown.
Judgment & Decree
ISPAHANI, J.
‑I agree. A. H. Order accordingly