1991 P Cr (PLP)
NHIZAR HAYAT alias KHIZ90 — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
| Citation | 1991 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | N/A |
| Parties | NHIZAR HAYAT alias KHIZ90 — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1991 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1991 P Cr (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 Cr (PLP) (NHIZAR HAYAT alias KHIZ90 — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Nemo for Petitioner.
Headnotes / Summary
S.411
No person from the public was produced to prove recovery of mares from accused
No case regarding theft of mares allegedly recovered from accused was registered
Accused; therefore, could not be said to have been keeping the mares dishonestly knowing the same to be stolen property
Accused was acquitted in circumstances.
Judgment & Decree
S.411
No person from the public was produced to prove recovery of mares from accused
No case regarding theft of mares allegedly recovered from accused was registered
Accused; therefore, could not be said to have been keeping the mares dishonestly knowing the same to be stolen property
Accused was acquitted in circumstances. Nemo for Petitioner. Ch. Imtiaz Ahmad for the State. Date of hearing: 6th March, 1991. Khizar Hayat petitioner was tried separately in two cases under section 411, P.P.C. on the charge of keeping the stolen mares, which were allegedly recovered from him by Haq Nawaz, A.S.I. on 13-5-1980. The trial Court convicted him in both the cases and sentenced him to one year's R.I. in each case. Feeling aggrieved, he filed two separate appeals, which were dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge on 2-10-1982. I propose to dispose of these two revisions through this single judgment.
2. No one has appeared for the petitioner. Since the revision, after having been admitted, cannot be dismissed for non-prosecution, so I have examined the case with the assistance of the learned counsel for the State. I find that in these cases, it was during a Nakabandi that Haq Nawaz, A.S.I. recovered two mares from the petitioner as suspected stolen property under section 550 of the Cr.P.C. In a case giving rise to Criminal Revision No.627 of 1982, Bashir Ahmad P.W. approached the police after some days of the alleged recovery and stated that one year back, his mare was stolen. He identified one of the two mares allegedly recovered from the petitioner as his mare. In a case giving rise to Criminal a Revision No.628 of 1982, Gul Sher P.W. appeared before the police and stated that five months back, his mare was stolen from his house. He identified the other mare allegedly recovered from the petitioner as his stolen mare. Furthermore, no person from the public was produced to prove the recovery of mares from the petitioner. Since no case was registered with regard to the theft of the mares, which allegedly were recovered from the petitioner on 13-5-1980, therefore, it cannot be said that the petitioner was keeping the two mares dishonestly knowing the same to be stolen property.
3. Pursuant to the above discussion, the revisions are accepted and the conviction and sentence of the petitioner is set aside. He is acquitted of the charge. He is on bail. He stands discharged of his bail bonds. N.H.Q./K-320/L Revisions accepted.