1995 P Cr (PLP)
WARIS ALI — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 1995 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | WARIS ALI — Petitioner 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) (WARIS ALI — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Sahibzada Farooq Ali Khan for Petitioner
Headnotes / Summary
S. 426(1-A)(c)
Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S.302(c)
Suspension of sentence during pendency of appeal
Injuries attributed to accused had not contributed towards the death of the deceased-- Complainant had admitted his enmity with the accused
Statutory period of two years had elapsed and still the appeal filed by accused against his conviction and sentence was not likely to be heard in the near future-- Sentence of accused was suspended in circumstances and he was admitted to bail accordingly.
Judgment & Decree
CH. GHULAM SARWAR, J.
Waris Ali petitioner was convicted under section 302(c), P.P.C. by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Layyah and has been sentenced to undergo 10 years' R.I. with a fine of Rs.10,000 and in default he has been directed to undergo six months' R.I. in case F.I.R. No.29, dated 29-3-1991 registered at Police Station Chaubara, District Layyah. The petitioner was tried alongwith another Waris Ali son of Muhammad Siddique, his co-accused for committing the murder of one Muhammad Ashraf on 28-3-1991
2. It was contended that according to the best evidence of the prosecution i.e., the-statement of Muhammad Arif P.W.5, the petitioner is said to have given a stick blow on the right leg and buttock of the deceased. None of the injuries alleged to the petitioner has contributed towards the death of the deceased because the cause of death was the head injury attributed to the co-used of the petitioner. It was also argued that the enmity of the petitioner with the complainant has been admitted by him when the complainant as P.W.5 stated that father of the petitioner had got a case registered under section 468, 420 P.P.C. against him for his procuring a teacher's post on the basis of bogus certificate. The statutory period having lapsed in the case was so urged.
3. This application was opposed on behalf of the State.
4. After having heard both sides and having gone through the record we' are convinced to suspend the sentence of the petitioner in view of the fact that the injuries attributed to him have not contributed towards the death of the deceased and the complainant has admitted his enmity with the petitioner as a. criminal case was got registered against him by the father of the petitioner which is still pending and also that the petitioner was convicted on 8-12-1991' but the appeal filed by him has not been fixed for hearing so far and nor is; likely to be heard in the near future, provided he furnishes bail bonds in the sum of Rs.50,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of A.C.,, Chaubara. N.H.Q./W-57/L Sentence suspended.