1991 PCr (PLP)
MUZAMMIL HUSSAIN — Appellant Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 1991 PCr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | MUZAMMIL HUSSAIN — Appellant Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | (a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860), (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1991 PCr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: (a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860), (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1991 PCr (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: 1991 PCr (PLP) (MUZAMMIL HUSSAIN — Appellant Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Headnotes / Summary
S. 304, Part I
Grave and sudden provocation
Trial Court disbelieved prosecution case and its evidence and had based conviction of accused on his confessional statement that - on seeing his sister and her paramour in compromising position he killed them
Sentence of 10 years' R.I. on each count was held harsh and unprecedented
Maintaining sentence of fine substantive sentence was reduced to 5 years' R.I: on each count in circumstances.
S. 304, Part I
Payment of fine to legal heirs of deceased
Direction for payment of compensation to legal heirs of deceased is not mandatory
Victim had indulged in adultery
Direction for payment of compensation to legal heirs of such deceased was not approved:
Judgment & Decree
(b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)
S. 304, Part I
Payment of fine to legal heirs of deceased
Direction for payment of compensation to legal heirs of deceased is not mandatory
Victim had indulged in adultery
Direction for payment of compensation to legal heirs of such deceased was not approved: Sardar Ahmad Khan for Appellant. Nasir-ud-Din Ghauri for the State. Date of hearing: 14th April, 1991. This criminal appeal arises from the judgment of learned Sessions Judge, Bahawalpur, whereby he on 11-12-1990 convicted Muzammil Hussain appellant under section 304, Part I, P.P.C. and sentenced him to 10 years' R.I. on each count and a fine of Rs.3,000 in default thereof 6 months' R.I. He was also directed to pay compensation of Rs.3,000 to the legal heirs of each deceased.
2. Learned counsel for the appellant has not challenged the conviction. He has requested for reduction in sentence. He argued that after having disbelieved the prosecution case and evidence produced by it, the trial Court has accepted the plea of grave and sudden provocation of the appellant in which he claimed to have killed his real sister and her paramour on seeing them in compromising position, as such, 4he sentence of 10 years' R.I. on each count is harsh and excessive. Learned counsel for the State is of the same view.
3. I have considered the matter carefully. I find that the trial Court has disbelieved the prosecution case and its evidence and has based conviction of the appellant on his confessional statement in which he stated that on seeing his sister Mot: Nusrat Bibi with her paramour Muhammad Ramzan in compromising position in his (appellant's) house, he killed them. This being the position, the sentence of 10 years' R.I. on each count is really harsh and unprecedented. So it is reduced to 5 years' R.I. on each count. The fine imposed by the trial Court and sentence in lieu thereof is upheld. Since Muhammad Ramzan and Mst. Nusrat Bibi deceased had indulged in adultery. So the direction for payment of Rs.3,000 to the legal heirs of each deceased is not approved. Needless to say that direction for payment of compensation to the legal heirs of deceased is not mandatory because for the reasons to be recorded, the Court may decline to give such direction. The appellant will get benefit of the provision of section 382-B, Cr.P.C. as directed by the trial Court. MA.K./M-2984/L Order accordingly.