2007 PLP 2986 (YLR)
MUHAMMAD ALI — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 2007 PLP 2986 (YLR) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Ijaz Ahmad Chaudhry, J |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD ALI — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
| Primary Law | Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2007 PLP 2986 (YLR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2007 PLP 2986 (YLR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Ijaz Ahmad Chaudhry, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2007 PLP 2986 (YLR) (MUHAMMAD ALI — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Headnotes / Summary
S.426
Penal Code (XLV of 1898), S.302(b)/34
Accused who not alleged to be armed with any weapon and he was not attributed any Injury to the deceased
Role of "Jappha" only had been assigned to accused when co-accused had given "soova" blows on the body of the deceased
High Court was yet to determine as to whether the accused had shared common intention with co-accused for the murder of the deceased
Appeal was not likely to be heard in near future
Sentence of imprisonment for life of accused was suspended in circumstances and he was released on bail accordingly.; Saghir Ahmad Bhatti for the Petitioner. Ch. Masood Sabir for the State.
Judgment & Decree
IJAZ AHMAD CHAUDHRY, J.
Through this application under section 426 Cr.P.C. the petitioner has sought suspension of his sentence as he was convicted by the learned Additional Session Judge, Burewala, vide judgment dated. 28-4-2004, under section 302(b)/34, P.P.C. and sentenced to life imprisonment with direction for payment of Rs.50,000 as compensation to the heirs of the deceased under section 544-A, Cr.P.C, and in case of non-payment thereof, to further undergo S.I. for six months. However, benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C, was also extended to him.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner was not armed with any weapon and only role 'of `Japha' was ascribed to him while his co-accused Muhammad Afzal was alleged to have given `soova' blows on the body of the deceased. It is further contended that there are bright chances of acquittal of the petitioner while there is no likelihood of hearing of the main appeal. in near future and the period undergone by the petitioner in jail will not be compensated in any warmer, if ultimately he is acquitted, .hence the sentence maybe suspended.
3. Learned State counsel opposes the application.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and also perused the judgment. The petitioner was not attributed any injury to the deceased and he was also-not alleged to be armed with any weapon. But only role of `Japha' has been ascribed to him when co-accused Muhammad Afzal had given `soova' blows on the body of the deceased. Keeping in view the role ascribed to the petitioner it is still to be determined by this Court that whether he had shared common intention with the co-accused or not, but there is no likelihood of .hearing the main appeal in the near future. Hence, this application for submission of the sentence is accepted and the petitioner shall be released from jail subject to his furnishing bail bonds in the sum of Rs.1,00,000 with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of learned trial Court. N.H.Q./M-1430/E Sentence suspended.