1970 P Cr (PLP)
HYDER AND ANOTHER‑Appellants Versus THE STATE‑Respondent
| Citation | 1970 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | Shah Zaman Babar, J |
| Parties | HYDER AND ANOTHER‑Appellants Versus THE STATE‑Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1970 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1970 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: Shah Zaman Babar, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1970 P Cr (PLP) (HYDER AND ANOTHER‑Appellants Versus THE STATE‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Mohd. Ibrahim Memon for Appellant.
- Date of hearing: 30th March 1970.
Headnotes / Summary
(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 307/34 read with S. 324/34 Attempted murder‑Complainant charging accused and two other unidentified persons for inflicting grievous and simple injuries on him‑Complainant's account of specific blows given by each accused on different parts of his body, found not credible‑Accused given benefit of doubt and their convictions altered from one under S. 307/34 to S. 324/34 in circumstance. (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 324/34‑Sentence‑Accused found guilty of offence under S. 324, having already suffered sentence for over 2 months and appeal heard after about 2 years and 4 months --Sentence already undergone and fine of Rs. 500, held, sufficient to meet ends of justice in circumstances. Abdul Karim Lakhan for A.A.G. for the State.
Judgment & Decree
(1) One oblique incised wound 5" x 1/2" x 3/4" on the back of the lower part of the left side of the chest. (2) One oblique incised wound, 3/4" x 1/4" x 1" on the left side of the back of the chest, 1" medial to the upper end of the medial border of the left scapula. (3) One oblique incised wound, 2 " x 1/2' x 1 " on the back of the neck, causing fracture of 6th and 7th cervicle vertebrae. (4) One oblique incised wound 1 " x‑l/4 x 1/2" on the back of the right side of the neck. (5) One oblique incised wound, 3 " x 1 x 1 " on the back of the right scapula causing fracture of the right scapula. (6) One oblique incised wound, 3" x 1 /4" x bone deep on the middle of the frontal bone causing fracture of the frontal bone. (7) One oblique incised wound, 2 ' x 1/4" x 1/2" on the right side of the neck. (8) One oblique incised ‑wound, 2 ' x 1 /4" x 1" on the right shoulder, l to the right of injury No. 7. (9) One oblique incised wound, 3 " x 1 " x 2" on the right side of the lower 1/3 of the right thigh. (10) One oblique bruise l " x 1/2" on the dorsum of the left hand. The doctor opined that all the injuries were caused by a sharp cutting weapon such as hatchet except injury No. 10 which was caused by blunt weapon like lathi or back of hatchet. Injuries 3, 5, 6 and 9 were declared grievous in nature while the rest of the injuries were opined to be simple in nature. Madad Ali remained in Dadu Hospital up to 20‑10‑65.
4. The two appellants at the trial denied the charge and alleged false implication on account of enmity. No evidence in defence was produced by the appellants.
5. P. W. 2 Sher Muhammad, brother of Madad Ali injured (P. W. 1) lodged the F. I. R. In the F. I. R. Sher Muhammad charged the two appellants besides Yaqub and Maluk for inflicting hatchet injuries on the person of Madad Ali. At the trial P. W. 2 Sher Muhammad charged Amiro and Haider appellants only for giving hatchet blows to Madad Ali. Madad Ali the injured wit ness charged Haider and Amiro appellants besides two other whom he could not know for giving hatchet blows to him. In cross‑examination P. W. Madad Ali stated that Amiro and Haider were in front of him when they gave him blows, the other two assailants were towards his back and, therefore, he could not see them at the time of the occurrence. He further added that Amiro gave him blows at his back, arms and leg while Haider gave him blows on his leg and other parts of the body. It appears incredible to expect that Madad Ali while surrounded by four assailants would be able to find out specific blows given by each of the assailants on different parts of the body. As earlier stated, Madad Ali has charged the two appellants and two other unidentified persons for inflicting hatchet injuries on him. It will, therefore, be safe dispensation of criminal justice to give the two appellants the benefit of doubt with regard to the in fliction of grievous injuries on the person of Madad Ali. I, there fore, alter the conviction of the two appellants from that under section 307/34 to a lesser offence under section 324/34, P. P. C.
6. Now we come to the question of sentence. The offence was committed on 20‑9‑
65. The appellants were on bail during the trial till their conviction on 1‑5‑67 when they were remanded to jail. They remained in jail until ordered to be released on bail by this Court on 11‑7‑
67. The appellants have thus suffered about two months and ten days of the sentence of imprisonment. This appeal has been heard today after about two years and 11 months. Under these circumstances the sentence already under gone will be sufficient to meet the ends of justice. I, therefore, partially accept the appeal, alter the conviction of the appellants 307/34, P. P. C. to that under section 324/34, P. P. C. and sentence them to imprisonment they have already undergone and a fine of Rs. 500 or in default to undergo six months' further R. I., each. The fine, if realized, be paid to Madad Ali injured.
7. The appellants are on bail but not present. They are discharged from their bail bonds. The fine imposed be realized in accordance with law. Appeal partly accepted.