1990 PLP 1305 (SCMR)
NEHAR KHAN‑‑Petitioner Versus SHAUKAT ALI and another‑‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 1990 PLP 1305 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Aslam Riaz Hussain, Shafiur Rahman, |
| Parties | NEHAR KHAN‑‑Petitioner Versus SHAUKAT ALI and another‑‑‑Respondents |
| Primary Law | Penal Code (XLV of 1860)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1990 PLP 1305 (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 1305 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Aslam Riaz Hussain, Shafiur Rahman,.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1990 PLP 1305 (SCMR) (NEHAR KHAN‑‑Petitioner Versus SHAUKAT ALI and another‑‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ejaz Ahmad Khan, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 22nd August, 1989.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment of the Lahore High Court, dated 6‑4‑1988, in Criminal Revision No.766 of 1983). ‑‑‑S.302‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)‑‑‑Sentence, enhancement of‑‑‑ High Court while considering the question of sentence observed that trial Court had rightly declined to impose the extreme penalty of death as it was not clear from evidence as to what had transpired immediately before commission of the crime which was shrouded in mystery and possibility of some provocation to accused could not be ruled out‑‑‑Nothing could be pointed out in evidence on record to the contrary indicating that conclusion arrived at by High Court was not justified which was based on settled principles of law‑‑‑Petition for leave to appeal was accordingly dismissed.
Judgment & Decree
ZAFFAR HUSSAIN MIRZA, J.‑‑‑This is a petition by Nehar Khan complainant for leave to appeal against judgment dated 6th April, 1988, whereby a learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court dismissed his revision petition assailing the order of the learned trial Court, in the murder case of his son, in which respondent Shaukat Ali was found guilty under section 302, P.P.C. but was awarded the lesser penalty of life imprisonment. The appeal of respondent Shaukat Ali against his conviction and sentence was separately dismissed by a Division Bench of the same High Court vide judgment dated 6th April, 1988, in which the learned Judges had considered the question of sentence and agreed with the view of a trial Court and held that as it was not clear from the evidence what transpired immediately before the commission of the crime, which was shrouded in mystery, the trial Court rightly declined to impose the extreme penalty of death, because there was possibility of some provocation to the respondent which could not be ruled out. In the impugned judgment also the same reason was reiterated by the learned Single Judge which was found justified on the record of the evidence. We have heard the learned counsel and he has not been able to point out anything in the evidence on record to the contrary indicating that the conclusion arrived at by the learned Judge was not justified. Learned Judge proceeded on the basis of settled principles of law in rejecting the revision petition of the petitioner. ' We, therefore, find no substance in this petition which is accordingly dismissed. N.H.Q./N‑211/S Petition dismissed.