2008 PLP 300 (SCMR)
Haji MUHAMMAD LATIF — Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD WAHEED alias YASIR and another — Respondents
| Citation | 2008 PLP 300 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Khalil-ur-Rehman Ramday, Tassaduq Hussain Jillani and Ch. Ijaz Ahmad, JJ |
| Parties | Haji MUHAMMAD LATIF — Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD WAHEED alias YASIR and another — Respondents |
| Primary Law | Penal Code (XLV of 1860) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2008 PLP 300 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Penal Code (XLV of 1860) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2008 PLP 300 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Khalil-ur-Rehman Ramday, Tassaduq Hussain Jillani and Ch. Ijaz Ahmad, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2008 PLP 300 (SCMR) (Haji MUHAMMAD LATIF — Petitioner Versus MUHAMMAD WAHEED alias YASIR and another — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Rafique Javed Butt, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondents.
- Date of hearing: 17th October, 2005.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgments, dated 2-10-2003 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore passed in Criminal Appeal No.940 of 1998 and Murder Reference No.447 of 1998).
S. 302
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)
Leave to appeal was granted to consider, inter alia, whether the accused, who appeared to be a desperado, standing in the "Chowks" at night, carrying fire-arms and got flared up to the extent of causing death of others on trivial matters and for petty reasons, would deserve any mercy or leniency, and whether the factum of non-repetition of the blow which used to be treated as a mitigating circumstance in the by-gone days, when the weapons used were "Dangs" and "Sotas", would be a valid consideration even today when the weapons used are automatic and semi-automatic guns and rifles.
Judgment & Decree
KHALIL-UR-REHMAN RAMDAY, J.
Waheed convict was beating up a "Faqeer" (a Beggar) in "Tarannum Chowk" at about 10-30 p.m. on 30-171995. The fault of the complainant and his deceased son was that they had rescued the said beggar from the respondent-convict and had asked the said convict not to do such-like things. He did not like it. He came across the deceased after some time and told the said deceased that they had interfered in his matters and that he would teach them a lesson for it. The deceased went home and informed his complainant father about these threats extended by the convict. The father, along with the deceased song came to the convict to register his concern about the said threat. They were all unarmed. The convict was still standing in "Tarannum Chowk" and before the complainant party could even open their mouth, the convict fired a shot from his mouser which landed at the front chest of Farid deceased who consequently died paying the price from coming to the aid of a poor, helpless beggar.
2. Is this kind of person or kind of conduct which could invoke some sympathy justifying a lenient treatment for the killer? This question would require serious consideration.
3. The question would also be whether the factum of "non repetition of the blow" which used to be treated as a mitigating circumstance the he by-gone days when the weapons used were "Dangs" and "Sotas" would be a valid consideration even today when the weapons used are automatic and semi-automatic guns and rifles?
4. Another question which would also require consideration would be whether a person who appeared to be a desparado standing in "Chowks" at night carrying fire-arm weapons and who get flared up to the extent of causing death of others on trivial things and for petty reasons would deserve any mercy and leniency?
5. To consider these questions and others, we allow this petition and grant leave in the matter.
6. In order to avoid any complications arising out of delay in the disposal of the appeal, we would direct that the appeal be set down for hearing within six months. N.H.Q./M-328/SC Leave granted.