1988 PLP r (PCRLJ)
MUHAMMAD SHAFI and others‑‑Petitioners Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1988 PLP r (PCRLJ) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Khizar Hayat, J |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD SHAFI and others‑‑Petitioners Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1988 PLP r (PCRLJ)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1988 PLP r (PCRLJ)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Khizar Hayat, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1988 PLP r (PCRLJ) (MUHAMMAD SHAFI and others‑‑Petitioners Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Asghar Ali for Petitioners.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑S. 426‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 307, 324, 326 & 148/149‑ Sentence, suspension of‑‑Contention requiring deeper appreciation of evidence‑‑Deeper appreciation of evidence being neither permissible nor desirable at bail stage, suspension of sentence declined in circumstances‑‑One of the accused persons however, allowed bail for purpose of appearing in matriculation examination. Nemo for the State. Muhammad Iqbal Chaudhary for the Complainant.
Judgment & Decree
Asghar Ali for Petitioners. Nemo for the State. Muhammad Iqbal Chaudhary for the Complainant. This is a petition for suspension of sentence of the applicants who stand convicted under sections 148, 307, 324 and 326 read with 149, P.P.C. and sentenced to the maximum term of 5 years' R.I., plus fine each.
2. It is stated that six persons, namely, Asghar Ali, Muhammad Aslam. Muhammad Shafi, Muhammad Din, Mahboob Alam and Shaukat Ali suffered 16 injuries at the hands of the petitioners who are seven in number, including one grievous hurt found on the person of Muhammad Din (P.W.2). It is submitted that the grievous injury has not been attributed to any of the petitioner specifically and that from nature of the injuries the provisions of section 326 or 307, P.P.‑C. are not attracted.
3. It is next contended that Muhammad Shafi, petitioner, is to take matriculation examination commencing from 10th of instant and terminating on 10th of April, 1988, for which he has since received his roll number slip. Learned counsel has produced a photostat copy of the roll number slip for perusal. Learned counsel for the complainant opposes the petition.
4. I have considered the facts and circumstances of the case. The contentions raised by the learned counsel qua all the applicants need deeper appreciation of evidence which I am afraid is neither permissible nor desirable at this stage. However, in order to enable Muhammad Shafi. Petitioner, to take the examination his sentence is suspended till 10‑4‑1988 provided he furnishes bail bond in the sum of Rs.10,000 with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of Deputy Registrar (judicial) of this Court. He shall surrender in this Court on 10‑4‑1988 without fail. This petition to the extent of other petitioners is dismissed.
5. To come up on 10‑4‑1988. S.A./M‑729/L Order accordingly.