1988 PLP 360 (SCMR)
BASHIR AHMAD — Petitioner Versus SABIR ALI and others — Respondents
| Citation | 1988 PLP 360 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Aslam Riaz Hussain, Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Saad Saood Jan, JJ |
| Parties | BASHIR AHMAD — Petitioner Versus SABIR ALI and others — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Penal Code (XLV of 1860) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1988 PLP 360 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Penal Code (XLV of 1860) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1988 PLP 360 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Aslam Riaz Hussain, Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Saad Saood Jan, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1988 PLP 360 (SCMR) (BASHIR AHMAD — Petitioner Versus SABIR ALI and others — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Jari Ullah Khan, Advocate Supreme Court and Iqbal Ahmad Qureshi, Advocate- on-Record for Petitioner.
- Farooq Hussain Naqvi, Advocate Supreme Court and M.A.Qureshi, Advocate-on-Record, for Respondents Nos.1 to 4.
- Date of hearing: 12th December, 1987.
- Sadiq Hayat, Advocate Supreme Court for the State.
Headnotes / Summary
(Against the judgment of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, dated 18-3-1981 passed in Criminal .Appeal No.887 of 1979 and Revision Petition No.958 of 1979).
S.304, Part II--Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)--Leave to appeal--Grant of--Appreciation of evidence--Petition against acquittal--High Court having appreciated evidence properly, held, justified in acquitting accused--Leave to appeal refused. Sadiq Hayat, Advocate Supreme Court for the State.
Judgment & Decree
ASLAM RIAZ HUSSAIN, J.--Petitioner seeks leave to appeal against the judgment of the Lahore High Court dated 18-3-1981 acquitting the respondents 1 to 4, in a case u/s 304 Part-II, P.P.C.
2. We have gone through the impugned judgment and heard the learned counsel for the petitioner at considerable length. He took us through the relevant portions of the evidence on the record with view to show that the High Court had not properly appreciated the evidence and had wrongly believed the testimony of Sq. Leader Ghulam Muhammad Chaudhry (DW.1) with respect to the plea of alibi taken by Faqir Muhammad respondent.
3. After giving our anxious consideration to the contentions raised by the petitioner's counsel in the light of the evidence referred to by him, we are not persuaded to agree with the same. We are of the view that the High Court has appreciated the evidence properly and was justified in acquitting the respondents. Leave is, therefore, refused. M.I. /B-27/S Petition dismissed.