1991 P Cr (PLP)
ZAHID HUSSAIN SHAH — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 1991 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | ZAHID HUSSAIN SHAH — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1991 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1991 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1991 P Cr (PLP) (ZAHID HUSSAIN SHAH — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Ch. Abdul Wahid for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
Ss. 323 & 325
Accused was convicted under S.325, P.P.C. for causing grievous injuries to prosecution witness
No Radiologist was produced in proof of alleged grievous injury found on the person of prosecution witness
No justification thus existed to convict accused under S.325, P.P.C.-- Conviction of accused was set aside and he was convicted under S.323, P.P.C. instead.
Judgment & Decree
Ch. Abdul Wahid for Petitioner. Nemo for the State. Date of hearing: 3rd April, 1991. Zahid Hussain Shah, petitioner, stands convicted under section 325, P.P.C. and sentenced to one year's R.I. for causing grievous injuries to Nadir Ali P.W.
2. Admitting the criminal liability of the petitioner for the injuries found on the person of Nadir Ali, the learned counsel has questioned the nature of offence on the ground that the Radiologist having not been produced, the petitioner could not have been convicted under section 325, P.P.C. No one has appeared for the State.
3. I have considered the matter carefully. I feel persuaded to agree with the learned counsel for the petitioner. I find that since the Radiologist was not produced in proof of the alleged grievous injury found on the person of Nadir Ali P.W., so there was no justification to convict the petitioner under section 325, P.P.C. His conviction under this section is, therefore, set aside and instead he is convicted under section 323, P.P.C.
4. As for the sentence, I find that the occurrence took place in the year 1984. The petitioner was sent to jail thrice. After the rejection of his appeal, he remained in jail for one month and three weeks before he could be released on bail by this Court. In these circumstances, I feel that the agony of trial coupled with the imprisonment suffered by him as an undertrial prisoner and as a convict would meet the case. Order accordingly. H.B.T./Z-212/L Order accordingly.