1990 PLP 662 (SCMR)
AHMAD BAKHSH and others‑‑Petitioners Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1990 PLP 662 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Javid lqbal and Ghulam Mujaddid, JJ |
| Parties | AHMAD BAKHSH and others‑‑Petitioners Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Penal Code (XLV of 1860)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1990 PLP 662 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1990 PLP 662 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Javid lqbal and Ghulam Mujaddid, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1990 PLP 662 (SCMR) (AHMAD BAKHSH and others‑‑Petitioners Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Mukhtar Ahmad Farani, Advocate Supreme Court and Mahmood A. Qureshi, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners.
- Nemo for Respondent.
- Date of hearing: 14th June, 1989.
Headnotes / Summary
(From the judgment of the Lahore High Court, Bahawalpur Bench dated 4‑2‑1987 in Criminal Appeal No.118 of 1984/BWP. and Criminal Revision No.11 of 1985/BWP). ‑‑‑S302/34‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.l85(3)‑‑‑Contention that plea of self‑defence was neither considered nor properly appreciated by High Court who rejected the same summarily by observing "the story of self‑defence narrated by them does not ring true"‑‑‑Leave to appeal was granted to consider that without giving specific cogent reasons, the defence version could not be rejected in such like manner.
Judgment & Decree
Nemo for Respondent. Date of hearing: 14th June, 1989. GHULAM MUJADDID, J.‑‑Ahmad Bakhsh, Nazeer Ahmad and Muhammad Ali have filed this petition for leave to appeal against the judgment of the Lahore High Court, Bahawalpur Bench, dated 4‑2‑1987 whereby their appeal against their conviction and sentence of imprisonment for life under section 302/34, P.P.C. was dismissed. Learned counsel appearing in support of this petition submitted that Ahmad Bakhsh died somewhere in May, 1988. So this petition qua him stands abated. With regard to the remaining two, it was argued that the defence had taken the plea of self‑defence which was neither considered nor properly appreciated by the learned Judge of the Lahore High Court who rejected the aforesaid plea summarily by observing, "The story of self‑defence narrated by them does not ring true". Learned counsel contended that without giving specific cogent reasons, the defence version could not be rejected in such like manner. The contention needs examination. Leave is accordingly granted to consider the plea of self‑defence. M.A.K./A‑613/S Leave granted.