1986 PLP 1113 (SCMR)
MUHAMMAD AKRAM and others — Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD SIDDIQ and another — Respondents
| Citation | 1986 PLP 1113 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Aslam Riaz Hussain and Muhammad Afzal Zullah, JJ |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD AKRAM and others — Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD SIDDIQ and another — Respondents |
| Primary Law | (a) Constitution of Pakistan (1973), (b) Constitution of Pakistan (1973) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1986 PLP 1113 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: (a) Constitution of Pakistan (1973), (b) Constitution of Pakistan (1973) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1986 PLP 1113 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Aslam Riaz Hussain and Muhammad Afzal Zullah, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1986 PLP 1113 (SCMR) (MUHAMMAD AKRAM and others — Petitioners Versus MUHAMMAD SIDDIQ and another — Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ch. Ghulam Dastgir, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioners (in Cr. P.40-R/85).
- Sardar Muhammad Ishaq Khan, Advocate Supreme Court and Khan Imtiaz Muhammad Khan, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner (in Cr.P.42-R/1985).
- Nemo for Respondents (in both Crl. Petitions).
- Date of hearing: 5th April, 1986.
- Ch. Ghulam Dastgir, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners (in Cr. P.40‑R/85).
- Sardar Muhammad Ishaq Khan, Advocate Supreme Court and Khan Imtiaz Muhammad Khan, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner (in Cr.P.42‑R/1985).
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment and order, dated 17-3-1985 in Criminal Appeal 181 of 1982 passed by Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench, Rawalpindi).
Art. 185(3)--Criminal trial-- Accused's counsel not raising any legal contention and only wanting a reappraisal of findings of facts arrived at by Courts below--Case not fit for reappraisal of evidence--Petition dismissed.
Art. 185(3)--Sentence--Petition filed by complainant for enhancement of sentence of accused--Reasons recorded by High Court for reducing his sentence from death to imprisonment for life valid and proper- Interference declined by Supreme Court.
Judgment & Decree
ASLAM RIAZ HUSSAIN, J.‑‑This Order shall dispose of Cr.P. No.42‑R of 1985 filed by Muhammad Siddiq, accused /convict, and Cr. Petition No. 40‑R of 1985 filed by Muhammad Akram, Complainant, for the enhancement of the sentence of Mohammad Siddiq (respondent in the last mentioned petition).
2. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners in both petitions. The learned counsel for the accused/ respondent in Cr. Petition No.42‑R of 1985 has not raised any legal contention and only wants a reappraisal of the evidence on the record for the reversal of findings of facts arrived at by Courts below. After going through the impugned judgment and considering the contentions raised by the petitioner's counsel we do not consider this to be a fit case for reappraisal of evidence. Cr. petition no.42‑R of 1985 is, therefore, dismissed.
3. As for Cr. Petition No.40‑R of 1985 filed, by Mohammad Akram, Complainant, for the enhancement of the sentences of Mohammad Siddiq, we find that the reasons recorded by the High Court for reducing his sentence from death to imprisonment for life are valid and proper. We do not, therefore, consider it a fit case for interference. This petition, too, is therefore, dismissed.
4. This dispose of both the petitions. M. Y. H. . Petitions dismissed.