1986 PLP 1120 (MLD)
C H A N A N‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1986 PLP 1120 (MLD) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Ijaz Nisar, J |
| Parties | C H A N A N‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1986 PLP 1120 (MLD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1986 PLP 1120 (MLD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Ijaz Nisar, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1986 PLP 1120 (MLD) (C H A N A N‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Sahibzada Farooq Ali Khan and Altaf Ibrahim Qureshi for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑5. 426‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 304/325‑‑Suspension of sentence Pending appeal‑‑Statutory period of one year having expired‑‑No likelihood of early disposal of appeal‑‑Operation of sentence suspended and bail allowed in circumstances. Mazhar Hussain Mohal for the State.
Judgment & Decree
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 1 of 1984 and Criminal Appeal No. 205 of 1983, decided on 19th January, 1985. ‑‑‑5. 426‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 304/325‑‑Suspension of sentence Pending appeal‑‑Statutory period of one year having expired‑‑No likelihood of early disposal of appeal‑‑Operation of sentence suspended and bail allowed in circumstances. Sahibzada Farooq Ali Khan and Altaf Ibrahim Qureshi for Petitioner. Mazhar Hussain Mohal for the State. This is an application for the suspension of sentence dated 30‑8‑1983. The petitioner has been sentenced to 7 yearst R.I. under section 304, Part I, P.P.C. and to one year R.I. under section 325, P. P. C . Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. It is stated that Muhammad Shafi to whom injuries to the deceased were attributed has been acquitted while the petitioner to whom an injury to Sadiq P. W. was attributed has been convicted and awarded the aforementioned sentences.
2. The statutory period of one year has expired. There is not likelihood of the disposal of the appeal at an early date. I, therefore, suspend operation of the sentence and admit the petitioner to bail in[ the sum of Rs. 20,000 with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of A . C . Leiah. S. A. Sentence suspended.