1989 P Cr (PLP)
NAZIR AHMAD alias RASHID AHMAD‑‑Appellant Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1989 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Nazir Akhtar, J |
| Parties | NAZIR AHMAD alias RASHID AHMAD‑‑Appellant Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Penal Code (XLV of 1860)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1989 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Nazir Akhtar, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 P Cr (PLP) (NAZIR AHMAD alias RASHID AHMAD‑‑Appellant Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Bashir Ahmad Chaudhry for Appellant.
- Date of hearing: 7th February, 1989.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑S. 304, Part 11‑‑Quantum of sentence‑‑Deceased trying to commit rape with wife of accused when injured‑‑Fire injuries received by accused while rescuing his wife‑‑Only four injuries caused to deceased‑‑Accused not acting in cruel manner‑ Accused remained in jail for two years and more than two months‑‑Bail granted to accused about 12 years back‑‑Sentence reduced to one already undergone by accused in circumstances. Arif Shah‑v. The State 1977 S C M R 33 ref. Sheikh Javed Iqbal for the State.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑‑S. 304, Part 11‑‑Quantum of sentence‑‑Deceased trying to commit rape with wife of accused when injured‑‑Fire injuries received by accused while rescuing his wife‑‑Only four injuries caused to deceased‑‑Accused not acting in cruel manner‑ Accused remained in jail for two years and more than two months‑‑Bail granted to accused about 12 years back‑‑Sentence reduced to one already undergone by accused in circumstances. Arif Shah‑v. The State 1977 S C M R 33 ref. Bashir Ahmad Chaudhry for Appellant. Sheikh Javed Iqbal for the State. Date of hearing: 7th February, 1989. The appellant alongwith four others was tried in the Court of Sessions Judge, Muzaffargarh, for having formed an unlawful assembly on 13‑7‑1972 and caused the death of Bashir Ahmad and injured Muhammad Anwar, P.W. The trial Court convicted the appellant under section 304, Part II of the P.P.C. and sentenced, him to undergo R.I. for seven years with a fine of Rs.2,00r in default of payment to undergo R.I. for one year. The fine, if realized, was to be paid to the legal heirs of he deceased by way of compensation under section 544‑A of the Cr.P.C.
2. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant has not challenged the conviction of the appellant and has merely prayed for reduction of the sentence to the one already undergone. The learned counsel for the State has no objection to the same. In this connection, the learned counsel for the appellant has pointed out that the appellant had caused injuries to the deceased as he was going to commit rape with his wife and that he had not acted in a cruel manner. There are only four injuries on the body of the deceased, while the appellant had himself received five injuries in attempting to rescue his wife. The appellant was arrested on 16‑7‑1972 and was allowed bail in the month of May, 1974. He was convicted on 9‑9‑1976 and his sentence was suspended on 20‑1‑1977. In this way, the appellant remained confined in the jail as under trial prisoner for one year and ten months and as convict for four months and eleven days. If benefit of section 382‑B, Cr.P.C. is given to the appellant, then he has already served out two years two months and eleven days of his sentence. Relying on the case of Arif Shah v. The State 1977 S C M R 33, the learned counsel for the appellant contends that' the appellant be not sent back to jail after a long period of more than 12 year since the grant of bail to him. Agreeing with the submission made by the learned counsel for the appellant, I allow benefit of section 382‑B, Cr.P.C. to the appellant, uphold the conviction of the appellant and reduce his sentence to the one already undergone. The appeal is partly allowed with the modification in the sentence as mentioned above. The sentence of fine is remitted. S.A./N‑262/L Sentence reduced.