1991 PLP 1858 (SCMR)
THE STATE and another — Appellants Versus SAKHWAT and others — Respondents
| Citation | 1991 PLP 1858 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Abdul Shakurul Salam, Rustam S. Sidhwa and Muhammad Afzal Lone, JJ |
| Parties | THE STATE and another — Appellants Versus SAKHWAT and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Special Courts for Speedy Trials Act (XV of 1987) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1991 PLP 1858 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Special Courts for Speedy Trials Act (XV of 1987) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1991 PLP 1858 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Abdul Shakurul Salam, Rustam S. Sidhwa and Muhammad Afzal Lone, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1991 PLP 1858 (SCMR) (THE STATE and another — Appellants Versus SAKHWAT and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ch. Qamaruddin Khan Meo, Advocate-on-Record for Appellant (in CrA. No. 197 of 1987).
- Kh. Muhammad Afzal, Advocate Supreme Court and Abul S. Aasim Jafri, Advocate-on-Record for Respondents (absent) (in CrA. No. 197 of 1987).
- Kh. Muhammad Afzal, Advocate Supreme Court for Appellant (in Cr.A. No. 91 of 1988).
- Ch. Qamaruddin Khan Meo, Advocate-on-Record for Respondent (in CrA. No. 91 of 1988).
- Date of hearing: 1st June, 1991.
- Ch. Qamaruddin Khan Meo, Advocate‑on‑Record for Appellant (in CrA. No. 197 of 1987).
- Kh. Muhammad Afzal, Advocate Supreme Court and Abul S. Aasim Jafri, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondents (absent) (in CrA. No. 197 of 1987).
- Ch. Qamaruddin Khan Meo, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondent (in CrA. No. 91 of 1988).
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment dated 24-11-1987 of the learned Special Judge, Punjab; Special Court for Speedy Trial No.VI, Bahawalpur).
S. 12
Appeal shall lie to the High Court against judgment passed by the Special Court.
Judgment & Decree
ABDUL SHAKURUL SALAM, J.‑‑‑This order will deal with Criminal Appeal No. 197 of 1987 and Criminal Appeal No. 91 of 1988, the first by the State against acquittal of Sakhwat and Siddique respondents and the second by Liaqat against his conviction.
2. Sakhwat, Siddique and Liaqat were tried under section 302/307/34, P.P.C. by Punjab Special Court for Speedy Trials No.VI, Bahawalpur. Sakhawat and Siddique were acquitted whereas Liaqat was convicted under section 302, P.P.C. and sentenced to death and fine of Rs.50,000 in default of payment of fine to further undergo imprisonment for a period of one year. Half of the fine if recovered was to be paid to the heirs of Habib Ullah deceased as compensation. He was further convicted under section 307, P.P.C. for making attempt to murder Noor Muhammad P.W. and sentenced to undergo ten years' R.I. and fine of Rs.25,000 in case of default in the payment of fine, to undergo further of imprisonment for a period of six months. He was also convicted under section 307, P P.C. for making attempt to murder Khuda Bakhsh P.W. by firing at him and sentenced to undergo ten years' R.I. and fine of Rs. 25,000 in default to undergo further imprisonment for a period of six months. Half of the fine imposed under section 307, P.P.C. if recovered was to be paid to Noor Muhammad and Khuda Bakhsh as compensation. Sentences under section 307, P.P.C. were ordered to run concurrently. This is vide judgment dated 24‑11‑1987. The State as well as the convict filed appeals in the Lahore High Court at Bahawalpur Bench. These were returned with the objection that the appeals lay before the Supreme Court. 2‑A. Learned counsel for the appellants have submitted that the appeals were returned under some misunderstanding and were therefore, filed in this Court. However, according to the statutory provisions, section 12 of Special Courts for Speedy Trials Act, 1987, the appeals lay before the High Court. Therefore, they say that the appeals may be returned to be presented before the High Court. The appeals are returned to be presented before the proper Court. M.BA./627/S Appeals returned.