1972 PLP 331 (SCMR)
NUR MUHAMMAD‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE AND 2 OTHERS‑Respondents
| Citation | 1972 PLP 331 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | NUR MUHAMMAD‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE AND 2 OTHERS‑Respondents |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1972 PLP 331 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1972 PLP 331 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1972 PLP 331 (SCMR) (NUR MUHAMMAD‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE AND 2 OTHERS‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Hassan Ahmad Khan Kanwar, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Iqbal Ahmad Qureshi, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondents Nos. 2 and 3.
- Date of hearing : 7th July 1972.
- M. A. Bajwa, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Ijaz Ali, Advocate‑on‑Record for the State.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, dated the 28th April 1971, in Criminal Appeal No. 874 of 1969/Murder Reference No. 2 of 1970). Criminal trial‑Acquittal‑Petition for Special Leave to Appeal to Supreme Court against acquittal barred by time (3 days) Delay, held, could not be condoned unless delay occasioned by some act on part of respondent. Muhammad Khan v. Sultan and others 1969 S C M R 82 ref. M. A. Bajwa, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Ijaz Ali, Advocate‑on‑Record for the State.
Judgment & Decree
SAJJAD AHMAD, J.‑‑This petition is directed against the judg ment of a Division Bench of the Lahore High Court dated the 28th of April 1971, whereby respondents Makhna and Amir were acquitted of the charge of having murdered their co‑villager, Khan Muhammad, on the night between the 25th and 26th of August 1968. According to the office note, the petition is barred by three days, which is not disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioner. It has been held by this Court repeatedly that in petitions' against acquittal, delay cannot be condoned unless it is show that the petitioner was precluded from filing his petition in time due to some act of the acquitted respondent. See Muhammad Khan v. Sultan and others (1969 S C M R 82). No such act on the part of the acquitted respondents is alleged in the application for condonation of delay filed by the petitioner. The petition is, therefore, dismissed asp barred by time. Leave refused.