1991 P (PLP)
MUHAMMAD HANIF and another — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 1991 P (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | MUHAMMAD HANIF and another — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1991 P (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1991 P (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: N/A.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1991 P (PLP) (MUHAMMAD HANIF and another — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Muhammad Rashid Ahmad Raza for Petitioners.
Headnotes / Summary
S. 411
Both accused were found taking away stolen buffalo
Could not be said which of accused was in exclusive possession of stolen property
Prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt-- Conviction and sentence was set aside in circumstances.
Judgment & Decree
S.D. Qureshi for the State. Date of hearing: 21st April, 1991. Muhammad Hanif and Tariq Hussain, petitioners, stand convicted under section 411, P.P.C. and sentenced to one and a half years' R.I. and a fine of Rs.2,000 or in default thereof two months' S.I. on the charge of keeping stolen buffalo of Mubarik P.W. 2. The prosecution case is that on 13-5-1986, the petitioners were seen taking the buffalo with them, which was recovered from them by the police in the presence of Muhammad Yousaf and Faqir Muhammad P.Ws. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioners contended that the possession of the buffalo by the petitioners being joint, they could not have been convicted under section 411, P.P.C. The learned counsel for the State is not in a position to controvert him. 4. I have considered the matter carefully. I find that Muhammad Hanif, petitioner No.1, is the father of Tariq Hussain, petitioner No.2. According to the prosecution case, both of them were taking the buffalo, so it cannot be said as to who, out of the father and son, was in the exclusive possession of the buffalo. For this reason, the prosecution has not been able to prove its case beyond-reasonable doubt. 5. Pursuant to the above discussion, this petition is accepted. The conviction and sentence of the petitioners is set aside and they are acquitted of the charge. They are on bail. They stand discharged of their bail bonds. SA./M-2952/L Revision accepted.