1990 PLP 290 (SCMR)
MUZAFFAR HUSSAIN‑‑Petitioner Versus NAUKAR HUSSAIN and another‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 1990 PLP 290 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Afzal Zullah, Ghulam Mujaddid and |
| Parties | MUZAFFAR HUSSAIN‑‑Petitioner Versus NAUKAR HUSSAIN and another‑‑Respondents |
| Primary Law | Penal Code (XLV of 1860)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1990 PLP 290 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1990 PLP 290 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Muhammad Afzal Zullah, Ghulam Mujaddid and.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1990 PLP 290 (SCMR) (MUZAFFAR HUSSAIN‑‑Petitioner Versus NAUKAR HUSSAIN and another‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Q.M. Salim, Senior Advocate Supreme Court and Tanvir Ahmad. Advocate‑on‑Record (absent) for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 20th June, 1989.
Headnotes / Summary
(From the judgment of the Lahore High Court dated 6th July, 1987 in Criminal Appeal No. 741 of 1986 and Criminal Revision No. 593 of 1986). ‑‑‑S.304, Part 1I‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)‑‑‑Trial Court convicted accused under S.304, Part 11, P.P.C.‑‑‑Complainant filing revision for conviction under S. 302, P.P.C. and for award of capital sentence‑‑‑High Court after considering all the relevant facts found that occurrence took place at the spur of moment without any premeditation; nor did the accused take any undue advantage of situation, hence, conviction under S.304, Part II, P.P.C. was in accordance with law‑‑‑Judgment of High Court suffered from no legal infirmity‑‑ Petition for leave to appeal dismissed.
Judgment & Decree
Q.M. Salim, Senior Advocate Supreme Court and Tanvir Ahmad. Advocate‑on‑Record (absent) for Petitioner. Nemo for Respondents. Date of hearing: 20th June, 1989. GHULAM MUJADDID, J.‑‑Respondent Naukar Hussain and his brother Mohammad Hussain were tried by the Sessions Judge, Gujranwala, for the murder of Mohammad Anwar. The trial Judge, by judgment dated 11‑11‑7986, convicted Naukar Hussain under section 304, Part II, P.P.C. and sentenced him to five years R.I. and fine of Rs.2,000 or in default six months R.I. He was further ordered to pay Rs.10,000 as compensation to the legal heirs of the deceased and in default of its payment R.I. for six months. Benefit of section 382, Cr.P.C, was also given to him. Muhammad Hussain was acquitted. Naukar Hussain filed appeal against the judgment of the trial Court whereas the complainant (Muzaffar Hussain) filed revision for enhancement of sentence of Naukar Hussain and against the acquittal of Muhammad Hussain. The High Court by means of the impugned Judgment dismissed both the matters. Muzaffar Hussain seeks leave to appeal against the aforesaid judgment. Learned counsel appearing in support of this petition contended that the conviction recorded by the trial Court and confirmed by the High Court was not in accordance with law. It was not a case where Naukar Hussain respondent should have been convicted under section 304, Part II, P.P.C. According to the learned counsel, he deserved capital sentence under section 302, P.P.C. We have considered this submission in the light of the observations made by the High Court, do not find any force in it. The High Court after considering all the relevant facts held that the occurrence took place at the spur of the moment without any premeditation; nor did the respondent take any undue advantage of the situation. Hence his conviction was in accordance with law. The judgment of the High Court suffers from no legal infirmity. This petition is accordingly dismissed M.A.K./M‑1014/S Petition dismissed.