1985 PLP 596 (SCMR)
MUHAMMAD SOOTA and others‑‑Appellants Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1985 PLP 596 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Aslam Riaz Hussain and Nasim Hasan Shah, JJ |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD SOOTA and others‑‑Appellants Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1985 PLP 596 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1985 PLP 596 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Aslam Riaz Hussain and Nasim Hasan Shah, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1985 PLP 596 (SCMR) (MUHAMMAD SOOTA and others‑‑Appellants Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Muhammad Arif, Advocate Supreme Court with Ejaz Ahmad Khan, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners.
- Farooq Baidar, Asstt. A.‑G. for .the State. Date of hearing: 19th March, 1984.
- 2. When the case came up for hearing before this Court on 10‑3‑1984, it was found that there was no ground for interference with the judgment of the High Court as far as Boota petitioner was concerned. Notice was, however, issued to the Advocate‑General, Punjab, with regard to the case of Bashir Ahmad.
- 3. The case again came up for hearing today and we heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned State counsel appearing on behalf of the Advocate‑General, Punjab.
Headnotes / Summary
(Against the judgment of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, dated 14‑9‑1982, passed in Criminal Revision No. 488 of 1982). ‑‑‑Art. 185(3)‑‑ Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 307/34‑‑No ground shown for interference with judgment‑of High Court upholding conviction of petitioner‑‑Petition, however, converted into appeal and sentence of petitioner reduced to that already undergone by him in circumstances of case.
Judgment & Decree
Muhammad Arif, Advocate Supreme Court with Ejaz Ahmad Khan, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners. Farooq Baidar, Asstt. A.‑G. for .the State. Date of hearing: 19th March, 1984. ASLAM RIAZ HUSSAIN, J.‑‑ Muhammad Boota and Bashir Ahmad petitioners were tried alongwith Abdul Karim and Niaz for offence under section 307/34. P.P.C. The two co‑accused were acquitted but the petitioners were sentenced to 5 years' R.I. each and a fine of RS.2,000 each. Their appeal was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge Faisalabad and their criminal revision was dismissed by the High Courts in limine vide the impugned order. Hence the present petition.
2. When the case came up for hearing before this Court on 10‑3‑1984, it was found that there was no ground for interference with the judgment of the High Court as far as Boota petitioner was concerned. Notice was, however, issued to the Advocate‑General, Punjab, with regard to the case of Bashir Ahmad.
3. The case again came up for hearing today and we heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as well as the learned State counsel appearing on behalf of the Advocate‑General, Punjab.
4. In view of the minor role attributed to Bashir Ahmad petitioner, his counsel submitted that his sentence may be reduced to that already undergone by him. The learned State counsel has no objection. We also agree with the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner. We accordingly convert the petition, into appeal, accept it and reduce the sentence of Bashir Ahmad petitioner to that already undergone by him. The sentence of fine, is, however, maintained. He shall be set at liberty for with if not required in some other case. S.Q. Appeal accepted.