2008 PLP 123 (SCMR)
PATHAN — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2008 PLP 123 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Tassaduq Hussain Jillani and Ghulam Rabbani, JJ |
| Parties | PATHAN — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Penal Code (XLV of 1860) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2008 PLP 123 (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 123 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Tassaduq Hussain Jillani and Ghulam Rabbani, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2008 PLP 123 (SCMR) (PATHAN — 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.
- Nemo for Respondents.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment, dated 9-8-2006 passed by High Court of Sindh at Sukkur, in Criminal Appeal No.92 of 2001).
S. 302
Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)
Leave to appeal was granted by Supreme Court to consider, whether the conduct of the witnesses in not intervening to rescue deceased, had made their presence at the spot doubtful as also the question whether principles of fair administration of justice were adhered to by the courts below.
Judgment & Decree
Petitioner's learned counsel seeks leave to appeal against the judgment of High Court of Sindh, dated 9-8-2006 vide which petitioner's appeal was dismissed and death sentence awarded to him by the learned trial Court for the murder of Noor Muhammad was confirmed.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks leave on the ground that the prosecution story is repellent to common sense, that it is unbelievable that P. W.1 complainant Sikandar Ali who is real son of Noor Muhammad and two others would remain quiet when Noor Muhammad deceased was being belaboured by petitioner with scissors, that P.W.2 Baradi and P.W.3 Yousuf admittedly are not residents of the locality and are even otherwise closely related to the deceased, that the statement of Sikandar Ali P.W.1 remained uncorroborated by any independent circumstance, that the prosecution did not produce the Investigating Officer which seriously prejudiced the petitioner.
3. The prosecution story briefly stated is that petitioner who was a School Teacher got annoyed with Noor Muhammad, Head Master of the School as the latter transferred him to a far off place and in sequel to the said grudge on the fateful day at 8-45 A.M. he attacked Noor Muhammad and caused him as many as 12 injuries with scissors in the presence of complainant P.W.1 and two other witnesses namely P.W.2 Baradi and P.W.3 Yousuf. According to complainant he did not intervene as he was threatened by the petitioner.
4. Having heard the petitioner's learned counsel at some length and have gone through the evidence on record, leave to appeal is granted to consider, inter-alia, whether the conduct of the witnesses in not intervening to rescue Noor Muhammad makes their presence at the spot doubtful as also the question whether principles of fair administration of justice were adhered to by the learned Courts below. H.B.T./P-14/SC Leave granted.