1987 PLP 1512 (SCMR)
MUHAMMAD AKBAR‑‑Petitioner Versus Haji WAHID BAKHSH and others‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 1987 PLP 1512 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Aslam Riaz Hussain, Javid Iqbal and Saad Saood Jan, JJ |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD AKBAR‑‑Petitioner Versus Haji WAHID BAKHSH and others‑‑Respondents |
| Primary Law | Penal Code (XLV of 1860)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1987 PLP 1512 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1987 PLP 1512 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Aslam Riaz Hussain, Javid Iqbal and Saad Saood Jan, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1987 PLP 1512 (SCMR) (MUHAMMAD AKBAR‑‑Petitioner Versus Haji WAHID BAKHSH and others‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Syed Niaz Ali Shah, Advocate Supreme Court with S. Ali Imam Naqvi, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
- Khalid Ranjha, Advocate Supreme Court and S. Wajid Hussain, Advocate‑on‑Record (Absent) for Respondents Nos. 1 to 3.
- Date of hearing: 2nd June, 1987.
- Kh. Shaukat Ali, Advocate Supreme Court for the State.
Headnotes / Summary
(Against judgment of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, dated 24‑11‑1980 in Crl. Appeal No. 977 of 1978, Murder Reference No. 240 of 1978 & Cr. Revision 878 of 1978). ‑‑‑S. 302/34‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)‑‑Appeal against acquittal‑‑Enhancement of sentence‑‑Petitions for leave to appeal against acquittal of seven accused‑respondents and enhancement of sentences of three of them (in case acquittal was set aside)‑‑Court agreeing with reasons recorded by High Court for acquitting seven accused persons considered the case not fit for interference‑‑Petition against acquittal of seven respondents having been dismissed, petition for enhancement of sentence of three of them was also dismissed having become infructuous. Kh. Shaukat Ali, Advocate Supreme Court for the State.
Judgment & Decree
ASLAM RIAZ HUSSAIN, J.‑‑This order will dispose of Crl. PSLA No.16/81 and 17/81 both filed by Muhammad Akbar petitioner against the acquittal of the respondents.
2. Facts giving rise to these petitions are, briefly that 7 persons namely:
1. Haji Wahid Bakhsh
2. Waryam
3. Atta Muhammad 4.Bashir Ahmad
5. Zulfiqar
6. Muhammad Afzal, and
7. Muhammad Aslam, were tried for the murder of Muhammad Abdullah and Muhammad Kaswar, which took place on the night between 15th and 16th of September, 1977. The learned trial court by its judgment dated 11‑10‑1978, respondents 4 to 7 were convicted and sentenced to death under section 302/34 PPC it convicted and sentenced the remaining respondents to imprisonment for life. The convicts filed an appeal against their conviction and sentence before the High Court while Muhammad Akbar complainant petitioner filed a revision petition for the enhancement of the sentences awarded to Wahid Bakhsh, Waryam and Atta Muhammad. The learned High Court vide its judgment dated 24‑11‑1980 accepted the appeal of the respondents and acquitted all the 7 respondents and dismissed the revision filed by Muhammad Akbar complainant for the enhancement of sentences of the accused respondents. Hence the present petitions by the complainant.
3. In Cr. PSLA No.16/81 the complainant seeks leave to appeal against the judgment of the High Court with a view to get the acquittal of respondents 1 to 7 of the charge under section 302/34 PPC, set aside. Through Cr. PSLA No. 17/81 he seeks enhancement of the sentences of Wahid Bakhsh, Waryam and Atta Muhammad in case acquittal of the charge under section. 302/34 PPC is set aside).
4. We have gone through the impugned judgment and heard the learned counsel for the petitioner at considerable length. We are inclined to agree with the reasons recorded by a learned Division Bench of the High Court for acquitting the 7 respondents‑accused and do not, therefore, consider it a fit case for interference by this Court. Cr. PSLA No. 16/81 is, therefore, dismissed. .
5. Since Cr. PSLA No.16/81 against acquittal of the 7 respondents has been dismissed, the petition for enhancement of the sentences of the 3 respondents (in Crl. PSLA No. 17/81) has become infructuous and is consequently dismissed as such. S.Q./M‑122/S ‑‑‑‑‑ Petition dismissed.