1968 SCM R 59 (PLP)
Present: A. R. Cornelius, C. J. and Muhammad Yaqub Ali, Versus THE STATE-Respondent
| Citation | 1968 SCM R 59 (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | A. R. Cornelius, C. J. and Muhammad Yaqub Ali, |
| Parties | Present: A. R. Cornelius, C. J. and Muhammad Yaqub Ali, Versus THE STATE-Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1968 SCM R 59 (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1968 SCM R 59 (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: A. R. Cornelius, C. J. and Muhammad Yaqub Ali,.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1968 SCM R 59 (PLP) (Present: A. R. Cornelius, C. J. and Muhammad Yaqub Ali, Versus THE STATE-Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- S. M. Almas Ali, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Abdul Karim, Attorney for Petitioners.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of West Pakistan, Lahore, dated the 23rd October. 1967, in Criminal Revision No. 1135 of 1967). Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 323-One of defence witnesses admitting that incident of assault and injury on complainant in fact occurred-No reason assigned as to why case should be re examined in any respect-Leave ,:to appeal to Supreme Court refused-Constitution of Pakistan (1962), Art. 58 (3). [p, 6014 Nemo for the State.
Judgment & Decree
CORNELIUS, C. J.-The prosecution case on which the three petitioners stand convicted has been accepted by three Courts below, after proper scrutiny of the evidence in the first two Courts. The revision in the High Court was summarily rejected. Leave is sought to appeal further. The offence charged was that of causing hurt to Ali Muhammad, an acting lambardar, when he went to the petitioners to collect the land revenue due from them. It has been held proved on the evidence of Ali Muhammad, P. W. 1, Ghulam Qadii P. W. 2 and Allah Bakhsh, P. W. 4 together with the police report and the proof of injuries. The defence plea was that the whole case was false. A number of witnesses were produced to support it, but one of them admitted that the incident of assault and injury had in fact occurred. Mr. Almas Ali is unable to adduce any reason why the case should be re-examined in any respect. The petition is dismissed Petition dismissed.