2002 PLP 1067 (SCMR)
KHAIR DIN and others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD NIAZ and others‑‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 2002 PLP 1067 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Mian Muhammad Ajmal, Syed Deedar Hussain Shah and Abdul Hameed Dogar, JJ |
| Parties | KHAIR DIN and others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD NIAZ and others‑‑‑Respondents |
| Primary Law | Penal Code (XLV of 1860)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2002 PLP 1067 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2002 PLP 1067 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Mian Muhammad Ajmal, Syed Deedar Hussain Shah and Abdul Hameed Dogar, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2002 PLP 1067 (SCMR) (KHAIR DIN and others‑‑‑Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD NIAZ and others‑‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- M.A. Zafar, Advocate Supreme Court and Ch. Mehdi Khan Mehtab, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners (in Cr.P. No.683‑L of 2001).
- M.A. Qureshi, Advocate‑on‑Record and Ch. Mehdi Khan Mehtab. Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners (in Cr.P. No.693‑L of 2001).
- M.A. Qureshi, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondent (in Cr.P. No.683‑L of 2001).
- Nemo for Respondent (in Cr.P. No.693‑L of 2001).
- Date of hearing: 15th March, 2002.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment dated 1‑10‑2001 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore passed in Cr. A.273/96 and M.R. No. 162 of 1996). ‑‑‑‑S.302‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)‑‑‑‑Leave to appeal was granted by Supreme Court to re‑appraise the prosecution evidence and to, consider whether the High Court in circumstances of the case Was justified to reduce the sentence of accused from death to imprisonment for life.
Judgment & Decree
M.A. Qureshi, Advocate‑on‑Record and Ch. Mehdi Khan Mehtab. Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners (in Cr.P. No.693‑L of 2001). M.A. Qureshi, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondent (in Cr.P. No.683‑L of 2001). Nemo for Respondent (in Cr.P. No.693‑L of 2001). Date of hearing: 15th March, 2002. By this common order we propose to dispose of both the Criminal Petitions Nos.683‑L and 693‑L of 2001 as they have arisen out of common judgment and involved identical questions of law and facts. Learned counsel for the complainant‑petitioner contended that the High Court was not justified to reduce the sentence of Muhammad Niaz, respondent from death to life imprisonment on the ground that there was no preplanning or premeditation for the respondent to commit the offence. Leave to appeal is granted in Criminal Petition No.683‑L of 2001 to reappraise the prosecution evidence and to consider whether the High Court in circumstances of the case was justified to reduce the sentence of the respondent from death to life imprisonment. Leave in Criminal Petition No.693/2001 is also granted. Both the appeals shall be heard together. N.H.Q./K‑53/S ?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Leave granted.