1989 P Cr (PLP)
ALLAH BAKHSH‑‑Appellant Versus THE STATE‑ — Respondent
| Citation | 1989 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Nazir Akhtar, J |
| Parties | ALLAH BAKHSH‑‑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) (ALLAH BAKHSH‑‑Appellant Versus THE STATE‑ — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ch. Muhammad Anwar and Malik Muhammad Qasim for Appellant.
- Date of hearing: 7th February, 1989.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑S. 304, Part 1‑‑Quantum of sentence‑‑Prosecution evidence disbelieved‑ Accused convicted on his own statement raising plea of grave and sudden provocation‑‑Accused suffered 1‑1/2 years in jail‑‑Sentence suspended for more than 11 years‑‑Benefit of S.382‑B, Cr.P.C. was allowed to accused and his sentence was reduced to one already undergone in circumstances. Arif Shah v. The State 1977 S C M R 33 ref. Mian Ashfaq Ahmad for the State.
Judgment & Decree
Arif Shah v. The State 1977 S C M R 33 ref. Ch. Muhammad Anwar and Malik Muhammad Qasim for Appellant. Mian Ashfaq Ahmad for the State. Date of hearing: 7th February, 1989. The appellant alongwith four others was tried for offences under section 302/148/149, P.P.C. in the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Multan, for having committed the murder of Chiragh son of Waryam. The trial Court acquitted the co‑accused but convicted the appellant on his own statement under section 304, Part I of the P.P.C. and sentenced him to undergo R.I. for four years with a fine of Rs.2,000 or in default of payment to undergo further R.I. for two years.
2. The learned counsel appearing for the appellant has not challenged the conviction of the appellant but has merely prayed for reduction of the sentence to the one already undergone. The learned State counsel has no objection to the same.
3. The learned counsel for the appellant has calculated that the appellant has suffered imprisonment for a period of one year and five months. The appellant was arrested on 30‑7‑1976 and remained in the jail as under‑trial prisoner till 24‑10‑1977. After being convicted on 24‑10‑1977 the appellant filed an appeal in the High Court and his sentence was suspended on 18‑12‑1977. The learned counsel for the appellant has prayed for allowing benefit of section 382‑B, Cr.P.C. to the appellant. The learned counsel has relied on Arif Shah v. The State 1977 S C M R 33 to support his submission that the appellant be not sent back to the jail after a long period of more than eleven years since the grant of bail to him.
4. I am inclined to agree with the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant. In this case, the prosecution evidence was disbelieved and the conviction was recorded on the solitary statement of the appellant himself. He had seen his wife in a compromising position with the deceased and gave hatchet blows to him, while he was under grave and sudden provocation. His sentence was suspended on 18‑12‑1977. It will not be fair and proper to send him back to serve the remaining sentence in the peculiar circumstances of the case. I, therefore, allow benefit of section 382‑B of the Cr.P.C. to the appellant, maintain his conviction but reduce the sentence to the one already undergone. The sentence of fine is remitted. The appeal is partly accepted with the modification in the quantum of sentence as mentioned above. S.A./A‑733/L Sentence reduced.