1990 PLP 1113 (SCMR)
MUHAMMAD IDREES‑‑‑Petitioner Versus TANVEER alias TERU and others‑‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 1990 PLP 1113 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Nasim Hasan Shah, S. Usman Ali Shah and A.S. Salam, JJ |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD IDREES‑‑‑Petitioner Versus TANVEER alias TERU and others‑‑‑Respondents |
| Primary Law | Penal Code (XLV of 1860)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1990 PLP 1113 (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 1113 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Nasim Hasan Shah, S. Usman Ali Shah and A.S. Salam, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1990 PLP 1113 (SCMR) (MUHAMMAD IDREES‑‑‑Petitioner Versus TANVEER alias TERU and others‑‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- MA. Zafar, Advocate Supreme Court and M. Aslam, Advocate‑on -Record for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 20th January, 1990.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment dated 15‑12‑1984 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore in Criminal Appeal No. 542 of 1980 and others). ‑‑‑‑S. 304, Part I‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)‑‑‑Inference drawn by High Court that injuries received by accused were caused during the same occurrence in which deceased lost his life was a possible one and needed no interference‑‑‑Petition for leave to appeal was dismissed accordingly.
Judgment & Decree
(1) Incised. wound 2 cm x 1/2 cm x skin deep at right wrist joint. (2) Abrasion 1 cm x 1/2 cm x 1/4 cm at left hand. Likewise, the following three simple injuries were found on the person of Khalid accused: (1) Abrasion 1/4 cm at the left side of face. (2) Abrasion 1/4 cm at left upper eye‑brow. (3) Abrasion 1 cm x 1/4 cm in between thumb and index finger of the right hand. In view of the existence of bad blood between the parties ignited by the incident taking place day prior to the occurrence and the un‑explained injuries on the persons of the accused particularly Khalid who had suffered injuries on the face, left upper eye‑brow and the hand, a reasonable inference can be drawn that the prosecution has not come forward with the true story and has suppressed material facts. In such circumstances, the Court is competent to form its own view as to the manner in which the occurrence had taken place. From the circumstances of the case, in all probability it appears that there was a chance encounter between the accused and the complainant party, leading to a physical quarrel resulting in injuries to both sides. Tanweer and Khalid did participate in the occurrence and not only caused injuries to the deceased with their respective weapons but also suffered injuries at the hands of the complainant party." The conclusion was expressed as follows:‑‑ "As in our view it was an unpremeditated incident the offence would I‑‑,t.3tT more appropriately fall under section 304, Part 1, P.P.C " Mr. MA. Zafar, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the view of ‑the High Court that the accused‑.respondents had, also received injuries during the course of the incident which were suppressed by the P.Ws. was not correct and, therefore, the conclusion drawn by the High Court that the encounter between the parties had occurred per chance which led to a physical quarrel resulting in injuries to both sides, is not justified. We have considered this argument and find that the inference drawn by the learned Judges in the High Court that the injuries received by the respondents were caused during the same occurrence in which Muhammad Ehsan deceased lost his life is a possible one. In these circumstances, we do not think that this is a fit case for interfering with the judgment of the High Court and altering the conviction or enhancing the sentence imposed by the High Court. Dismissed. N.H.Q./M‑1233/S Petition dismissed.