1994 PLP 77 (SCMR)
GHULAM SARWAR‑‑‑Appellant Versus MUHAMMAD AKRAM alias AKKU and another‑‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 1994 PLP 77 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Abdul Shakurul Salam and Muhammad Rafiq Tarar, JJ |
| Parties | GHULAM SARWAR‑‑‑Appellant Versus MUHAMMAD AKRAM alias AKKU and another‑‑‑Respondents |
| Primary Law | Penal Code (XLV of 1860)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1994 PLP 77 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1994 PLP 77 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Abdul Shakurul Salam and Muhammad Rafiq Tarar, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1994 PLP 77 (SCMR) (GHULAM SARWAR‑‑‑Appellant Versus MUHAMMAD AKRAM alias AKKU and another‑‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Muhammad Munir Khan, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Sh. Masood Akhtar, Advocate‑on‑Record for Appellant. ‑
- Aftab Farrukh, Advocate Supreme Court for Respondents.
- Date of hearing‑ 13th February., 1993.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, dated 9‑3‑1992 passed in Cr. Appeal No. 751 of 1989 and M.R. No. 290 of 1989). ‑‑‑‑S. 302‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)‑‑‑Sentence. enhancement of‑‑‑High Court had taken notice of the accused being humiliated by his father‑in‑law (deceased) when he had gone to fetch his wife and son‑‑‑Alternate sentence of imprisonment for life awarded to the accused by High Court, therefore, did not call for interference by Supreme Court‑‑ Leave to appeal was refused accordingly.‑‑‑[Sentence].
Judgment & Decree
Aftab Farrukh, Advocate Supreme Court for Respondents. Date of hearing‑ 13th February., 1993. ABDUL SHAKURUL SALAM, J.‑‑‑Respondent stands convicted under section 302, P.P.C. for the murder of his father‑in‑law and sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine etc. vide order of the learned Division Bench of the Lahore High Court vide order dated 9‑3‑1992.
2. The first petition (Cr.P. No. 117/1,/1992) is by the complainant for enhancement of sentence and the second (Cr.P. No. 139/1, of 1992) by the convict against his conviction.
3. Learned counsel for the complainant has submitted that the learned High Court erred in reducing the sentence from death to life imprisonment.
4. Contention of the learned counsel for the convict respondent is that he had gone to fetch his wife and son and was slapped by this father‑in‑law. The occurrence had come about by chance.
5. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the order of the High Court wherein it took notice of the respondent being humiliated we do not think that the alternate sentence awarded to the respondent by the learned High Court calls for interference by this Court. The petition is, therefore, dismissed.
6. In view of the above, learned counsel for the convict does dot press the petition. Both the petitions stand dismissed. N.H.Q./G‑415/S Leave refused.