2011 SCMR 1110 (PLP)
KHALID MEHMOOD — Petitioner Versus THE STATE-Respondent
| Citation | 2011 SCMR 1110 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Javed Iqbal and Anwar Zaheer Jamali, JJ |
| Parties | KHALID MEHMOOD — Petitioner Versus THE STATE-Respondent |
| Primary Law | Penal Code (XLV of 1860) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2011 SCMR 1110 (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Penal Code (XLV of 1860) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2011 SCMR 1110 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Javed Iqbal and Anwar Zaheer Jamali, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2011 SCMR 1110 (PLP) (KHALID MEHMOOD — Petitioner Versus THE STATE-Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Muhammad Zaman Bhatti, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner.
- Mr. Muhammad Zaman Bhatti, learned Advocate Supreme Court entered appearance on behalf of petitioner namely Khalid Mehmood and urged with vehemence that the sentence of death could not have been awarded by way of Qisas and the learned trial Court as well as the learned High Court have not diverted their attention to the relevant provisions as enumerated in sections 306(c), 307 and 308, P.P.C. The said contention has been supported by the dictum laid down in case titled Khalil-uz-Zaman v. Supreme Appellate Court (PLD 1994 SC 885). It is also contended that the matter may be remanded so that the above mentioned legal proposition could be dilated upon and decided which has been ignored causing serious prejudice against the petitioner. In so far as the murder of Muhammad Muslim is concerned it is pointed out that the evidence also needs re-evaluation because sentence of death could not have been awarded even in his case.
- 2. Mr. Sher Awan, learned Additional Prosecutor-General entered appearance for State and while controverting the view point as canvassed at bar by Mr. Muhammad Zaman Bhatti, learned Advocate Supreme Court on behalf of petitioner, supported the judgment impugned but not plausible justification could be furnished that as to why the relevant provisions enumerated in sections 306(c), 307 and 308, P.P.C. have been ignored by the learned trial Court and learned High Court.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment dated 3-5-2010 Lahore High Court, Bahawalpur Bench, Bahawalpur in Criminal Appeal No. 229 of 2005).
Ss. 306(c), 307 & 308
Constitution of Pakistan, Art.185(3)
Qatl -e-amd not liable to Qisas
Contentions of the counsel of accused/convict were that sentence of death could not have been awarded by way of Qisas and the Trial Court as well as the High Court had not diverted their attention to the relevant provisions as enumerated in sections 306(c), 307 and 308, P.P.C. and that the matter may be remanded so that legal proposition could be dilated upon and decided which had been ignored causing serious prejudice against the petitioner
Supreme Court granted leave, inter alia, to consider the contentions and converted the petition into appeal. Sher Await, Additional Prosecutor-General for the State.
Judgment & Decree
Mr. Muhammad Zaman Bhatti, learned Advocate Supreme Court entered appearance on behalf of petitioner namely Khalid Mehmood and urged with vehemence that the sentence of death could not have been awarded by way of Qisas and the learned trial Court as well as the learned High Court have not diverted their attention to the relevant provisions as enumerated in sections 306(c), 307 and 308, P.P.C. The said contention has been supported by the dictum laid down in case titled Khalil-uz-Zaman v. Supreme Appellate Court (PLD 1994 SC 885). It is also contended that the matter may be remanded so that the above mentioned legal proposition could be dilated upon and decided which has been ignored causing serious prejudice against the petitioner. In so far as the murder of Muhammad Muslim is concerned it is pointed out that the evidence also needs re-evaluation because sentence of death could not have been awarded even in his case.
2. Mr. Sher Awan, learned Additional Prosecutor-General entered appearance for State and while controverting the view point as canvassed at bar by Mr. Muhammad Zaman Bhatti, learned Advocate Supreme Court on behalf of petitioner, supported the judgment impugned but not plausible justification could be furnished that as to why the relevant provisions enumerated in sections 306(c), 307 and 308, P.P.C. have been ignored by the learned trial Court and learned High Court.
3. In view of what has been mentioned herein above, we are inclined to grant leave, inter alia, to consider the above referred to contentions. The petition is converted into appeal which may be fixed at some early date. M.A.K./K-4/SC Leave granted.