1982 PLP (2) (SCMR)
QALANDAR KHAN‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑Respondent
| Citation | 1982 PLP (2) (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Haleem, Actg., C. J. Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Burhanuddin Khan, JJ |
| Parties | QALANDAR KHAN‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Cr. P. S. L. A. No. 80‑R of 1982, Cr. P. S. L. A. No. 58‑P of 1981, Cr. P. S. L. A. No. 2‑P of 1982 |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1982 PLP (2) (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Cr. P. S. L. A. No. 80‑R of 1982, Cr. P. S. L. A. No. 58‑P of 1981, Cr. P. S. L. A. No. 2‑P of 1982 as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1982 PLP (2) (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Muhammad Haleem, Actg., C. J. Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Burhanuddin Khan, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1982 PLP (2) (SCMR) (QALANDAR KHAN‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Qazi Abdur Rashid, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner.
- Bashirullah, A. A‑.G. (N.‑W. F. P. Peshawar) for Respondent.
- Bashirullah, A. A.‑G. (N.‑W. F. P. Peshawar) for Petitioner.
- Qazi A. Rashid, Advocate Supreme Court and Ch. A. Rahman, Advocate Supreme Court for Respondent.
- Zafar Mahmood, Senior Advocate Supreme Court instructed by M. Kowkab Iqbal, Advocate‑on‑Record (absent) for Petitioner.
- Qazi A. Rashid, Advocate Supreme Court, Ch. Akhtar Ali, Advocate‑on -Record and Ch. A. Rahman, Advocate Supreme Court for Respondent.
- Date of hearing: 20th March, 1982.
- STATE THROUGH ADVOCATE‑GENERAL N: W. F. P.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment and order dated 15‑1‑1981 of the Peshawar High Court, Camp at Abbottabad, in Criminal Appeal No. 292 of 1979). (a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)‑
Ss. 302 & 307 read with Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)‑Leave to appeal granted to consider whether plea of self defence having been conceded to accused could he be convicted under S. 307, since such offence prima facie formed part of same occurrence which resulted in death of one of his adversaries. (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)‑
Ss. 302 & 307 read with Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)‑Leave to appeal‑‑Granted to State and complainant to consider whether explanation offered from State (complainant's side) as to injuries on person of accused and his co‑accused as also damage to accused's car manufactured after relevant occurrence in order to support false plea of self‑defence.
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J‑Leave to appeal has been sought in these three matters which arise out of the same murder case. Two petitions are against the acquittal of Qalandar Khan accused in so far as the charge of murder is concerned, while one by Qalandar Khan is directed against his conviction and sentence under section 307, P. P. C. After hearing all the learned counsel, we grant leave to appeal in Criminal Petition No. 58‑P of 1981 to consider the question as whether the plea of self‑defence having been conceded to Qalandar Khan accused, could, he be convicted for the offence under section 307, P. P. C. as it prima facie formed part of the same occurrence which had resulted in death of one of hi adversaries. We also grant leave to appeal to the State and the complainant in Criminal Petitions Nos. 2‑P/82 and 80‑R of 1981 to consider the question whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the explanation offer from the State/complainants side that the injuries on the person of Qalandar Khan and his co‑accused Noor Muhammad (who was acquitted) as also the damage to Qalandar Khan's car were all manufactured after the relevant occurrence in order to support a false plea of self-defence. All the three matters shall be heard together. Qalandar Khan, it is stated, is serving the sentence for offence under section 307, P. P. C. If it is so, he shall not be released after he has served that sentence unless he furnishes a bail bond and a surely in the sum of Rs. 20,000 each to the satisfaction of A. C., Abbottabad. In case, be, in the meantime after serving the said sentence has been released, bail able warrants of his arrest in the sum of Rs. 20,000 shall be issued. Leave granted.