1968 P Cr (PLP)
ZAMIR AHMAD‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑Respondent
| Citation | 1968 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court |
| Bench Members | A. R. Cornelius, C. J. and Fazle‑Akbar, J |
| Parties | ZAMIR AHMAD‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1968 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1968 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court bench comprising: A. R. Cornelius, C. J. and Fazle‑Akbar, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1968 P Cr (PLP) (ZAMIR AHMAD‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Amjad Hussain, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Abdul Karim, Attorney for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 302‑Murder‑Exchange of hot words between deceased and his uncle‑‑Uncle felling down deceased on ground‑Accused, a relation, whipping out knife and stabbing deceased first on chest, next on abdomen‑Accused, held, had no justification in stabbing deceased on vulnerable parts of body and nature of injuries was clearly indicative of intention to kill Petition for special leave to appeal dismissed‑Constitution of Pakistan (1962), Art. 58(3):
Judgment & Decree
FAZLE AKBAR, J.‑The petitioner Zamir Ahmad stands convicted under section 302, P. P. C. and sentenced to trans portation for life for the murder of one, Fazal Ilahi. The incident took place on the morning of 3rd March 1963, at Sabzi Mandi outside the gate of Main Bazar, Phularwan Mandi. When Fazal Ilahi was going to his house, he saw his uncle Lazim Ali and his relation Zamir Ahmad, standing there. Fazal Ilahi and Lazim Din exchanged hot words and then the latter caught hold of the former and felled him on the ground and thereupon Zamir. Ahmad whipped out a knife and stabbed him as twice, first on the right side of his chest and then on his abdomen. The injured succumbed to his injuries in the Hospital. Ocular evidence was given by a number of person: who have shops in the bazar. In, view of the evidence of the disinterested witnesses the learned Counsel has found it difficult to challenge the findings of the Courts below that this petitioner was responsible for the death of Fazal Ilahi. He has however contended that as this wag not a pre‑meditated murder, the petitioner should have been convicted under section 304, Part I, P. P. C. We are unable to accept this contention. The deceased exchanged hot words with his uncle and as such this petitioner bad no justification in stabbing the deceased on vulnerable parts of his body. The nature of the injuries clearly indicates that he intended to kill the deceased, We are, therefore, of the opinion that he has been rightly convicted under section 302, P. P. C. This petition is accordingly dismissed.