1990SCMR1301 (PLP)
MUHAMMAD RIAZ‑‑Petitioner Versus GHULAM QADIR and another‑‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 1990SCMR1301 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Shafiur Rahman, Abdul Qadeer Chaudhry and |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD RIAZ‑‑Petitioner Versus GHULAM QADIR and another‑‑‑Respondents |
| Primary Law | Penal Code (XLV of 1860)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1990SCMR1301 (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1990SCMR1301 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Shafiur Rahman, Abdul Qadeer Chaudhry and.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1990SCMR1301 (PLP) (MUHAMMAD RIAZ‑‑Petitioner Versus GHULAM QADIR and another‑‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Muhammad Munir Peracha, Advocate Supreme Court and Ch. Akhtar Ali, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondent No.l.
- Date of hearing: 5th March, 1990.
- Ch. M. Akram, Advocate Supreme Court for the State.
Headnotes / Summary
(From the judgment of Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench, Rawalpindi, dated 19‑10‑1987 passed in Criminal Appeal No.116 of 1986). ‑‑‑S.304, Part I‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)‑‑‑High Court in the light of evidence on record had accepted the version of accused and that of his daughter which made out a case of extreme sustained provocation‑‑‑High Court in doing so had not violated any provision or any principle of law‑‑‑Re‑appraisal of evidence was not undertaken by Supreme Court‑‑‑Leave to appeal was consequently refused. Ch. M. Akram, Advocate Supreme Court for the State.
Judgment & Decree
SHAFIUR RAHMAN, J.‑‑‑The petitioner, a brother of the deceased Muhammad Eja7, seeks leave to appeal against the judgment of the Lahore High Court dated 19‑10‑1987, whereby the conviction of the petitioner under section 302, P.P.C. was set aside and altered to one under section 304, Part 1, P.P.C., and the sentence already undergone was considered sufficient to meet the ends of justice.
2. Ghulam Qadir, respondent No:1 was tried for having caused the murder of Muhammad Ejaz on 29th of March, 1985 in a street within the limits of Police Station `Saddar, Attock' on the suspicion that he was maintaining illicit relations with his daughter Mst. Shakeela. The prosecution case was that it was an unprovoked murder, out in the street when Muhammad Riaz and Muhammad Ejaz were taking their bullocks to the fields. The defence version was somewhat different and it has been described at great length by the convict himself in his statement More the Court. In support his daughter Mst. Shakeela also appeared.
3. If the statement of the convict and that of his daughter is given any credence, it would be a case of extreme sustained provocation. The High Court has in the light of evidence on record accepted their version and we do not consider that in doing so the Court has violated any provision or any principle of law. Hence it will be a case of re‑appraisal of evidence which is not undertaken.
4. Leave to appeal is, therefore, refused. N.H.Q./M‑1319/S Leave refused.