1995 P Cr (PLP)
Before Ch. Ghularn Sarwar and Muhammad Nawaz Abbasi, JJ Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 1995 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | Before Ch. Ghularn Sarwar and Muhammad Nawaz Abbasi, JJ Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1995 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1995 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1995 P Cr (PLP) (Before Ch. Ghularn Sarwar and Muhammad Nawaz Abbasi, JJ Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Sahibzada Farooq Ali for Petitioner
- 3. The bail was opposed by the learned Assistant Advocate-General appearing on behalf of the State..
Headnotes / Summary
S. 426(1-A)(c)
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.302/34
Statutory period of two years had elapsed
Accused was only alleged to have held the deceased in his clasp when co-accused inflicted a dagger blow
Accused -was empty-handed at the time of occurrence and no injury was attributed to him
Deceased had also received a 'solitary blow and it was not repeated
Sentence of accused was suspended in circumstances and he was released on bail-accordingly.
Judgment & Decree
CH. . GHULAM SARWAR,' J.
Allah Ditta, petitioner, being convicted under section 302/34, P.P.C. has been sentenced to ~ life imprisonment and a fine of Rs.50,000 and in default he is to suffer three years' R.I. in case F.I.R. No.215/89 of Police Station Shujabad, by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Multan vide his judgment, dated 30-11-1991. He has moved this Court under section 426, Cr.P.C. for the suspension of the abovenoted sentence and to release him on bail.
2. It was argued that the statutory period of two years in this case has elapsed and until crow the case has not been fixed, heard or disposed of. It was added that it will take quite a long time for hearing of the appeal because the paper book is yet to be printed in the case. It was also argued that the only allegation against the petitioner is that he held the deceased in his clasp while his co-accused inflicted solitary blow, so the petitioner is entitled to be released on bail in this case.
3. The bail was opposed by the learned Assistant Advocate-General appearing on behalf of the State..
4. We have given our earnest thoughts to the arguments advanced by both sides and have also gone through the record very minutely. We find that the complainant Maan Khan, has filed a Criminal Revision No.195 of 1991 for enhancement of sentence passed upon the petitioner as well as on Allah Nawaz which was put up before this Court on 26-1-1992 on which date notice of enhancement of sentence to Allah Nawaz was issued and as far as the petitioner is concerned, the revision petition was dismissed by the same order.
5. We also find that the occurrence in this case took place on 11-8-1989 and the conviction against the petitioner was recorded on 30-11-1991. He is in jail since his arrest and the only allegation against him is; that he held the ceased in his Jappah when the co-accused inflicted a dagger blow. However, was empty-handed at the time of occurrence and no injury is attributed to him. The deceased had also received a solitary blow and it- was not repeated.
6. In view of the facts narrated and the contentions raised, we are persuaded to suspend the conviction and sentence of the petitioner with the direction to release him from jail if he furnishes bail bonds in the sum of Rs.50,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of A.C./Duty Magistrate, Multan. N.H.Q./A-734/1, Sentence suspended.