1992 P Cr (PLP)
THE STATE‑‑‑Appellant Versus MUIJAMMAD KHALIL ‑‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1992 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Sardar Muhammad Dogar, J |
| Parties | THE STATE‑‑‑Appellant Versus MUIJAMMAD KHALIL ‑‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Penal Code (XLV of 1860)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1992 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 1992 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Sardar Muhammad Dogar, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1992 P Cr (PLP) (THE STATE‑‑‑Appellant Versus MUIJAMMAD KHALIL ‑‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Rana Muhammad Arif A.A.‑G. for Appellant.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑‑S. 379‑‑‑Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S.417‑‑Appeal against acquittal‑‑‑Acquittal order was based on documentary evidence which the prosecution itself had attached with the challan and the same, therefore, did not call for interference‑‑‑Appeal against acquittal was ‑dismissed in limine accordingly.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑‑‑S. 379‑‑‑Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S.417‑‑Appeal against acquittal‑‑‑Acquittal order was based on documentary evidence which the prosecution itself had attached with the challan and the same, therefore, did not call for interference‑‑‑Appeal against acquittal was ‑dismissed in limine accordingly. Rana Muhammad Arif A.A.‑G. for Appellant. The respondents were challaned under section 379, P.P.C. for having allegedly cut 52 trees allegedly gown in the State land. After the submission of challan, they moved an application under section 249‑A, Cr.P.C. and prayed for acquittal on the grounds that the trees were standing in their land and that actually they had planted them. The learned Magistrate, on having found that the Executive Engineer, Highway, had submitted a report that the land on which the trees were standing belonged to the respondents and that the Deputy Commissioner vide report dated 19‑9‑1988 (photostat copy of which was placed before him) had also remarked that the trees had grown in the land which the respondents had given without compensation for constructing a road and also on being pointed out that after the registration of case, at ‑one stage, the Deputy Commissioner and the Superintendent of Police had got the case cancelled on finding the same as false, allowed the application filed by the respondents under section 249‑A, Cr.P.C. and acquitted them.
2. Not feeling satisfied, the State has filed appeal against the acquittal of the respondents.
3. The learned AA.‑G. has not been able to rebut the facts noted to the impugned judgment, that the X.E.N. Highway had reported that the trees were growing in the land belonging to the respondents; that at one stage the Deputy Commissioner and the S.P. had got the case cancelled and that the Deputy Commissioner had noted once that the trees were growing in the land which belonged to the respondents and which they ,had given free of cost for constructing a road. The acquittal order, which is based on documentary evidence, which the prosecution itself had attached with the challan, does not call for interference.
4. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed in limine. N.H.Q./S‑152/L Appeal dismissed.