1996 PLP 519 (SCMR)
Quetta ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus KHUDA‑I‑DAD‑‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1996 PLP 519 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Saiduzzaman Siddiqui, Irshad Hasan Khan and |
| Parties | Quetta ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus KHUDA‑I‑DAD‑‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Penal Code (XLV of 1860)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1996 PLP 519 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1996 PLP 519 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Saiduzzaman Siddiqui, Irshad Hasan Khan and.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1996 PLP 519 (SCMR) (Quetta ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus KHUDA‑I‑DAD‑‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ijaz Yousaf, Additional Advocate‑General Balochistan with M.W.N. Kohli, Advocate‑ on‑Record (absent) for Petitioner.
- Nemo for Respondent.
- Date of hearing: 14th December, 1994.
- THE STATE through Advocate‑General, Balochistan,
- Tariq Mehmood, Advocate Supreme Court for the Complainant.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment dated 3‑3‑1994 of the High Court of Balochistan, Quetta in Crl. Appeal No. 59/93). ‑‑‑‑S. 302/34‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)‑‑‑Appeal against acquittal‑‑‑Co‑accused of the accused had already been acquitted by Supreme Court who had filed a separate appeal‑‑‑Case of accused stood on a better footing and he appeared to have been rightly acquitted by the High Court‑‑‑Leave to appeal sought by State was refused accordingly. Tariq Mehmood, Advocate Supreme Court for the Complainant.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑‑‑S. 302/34‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)‑‑‑Appeal against acquittal‑‑‑Co‑accused of the accused had already been acquitted by Supreme Court who had filed a separate appeal‑‑‑Case of accused stood on a better footing and he appeared to have been rightly acquitted by the High Court‑‑‑Leave to appeal sought by State was refused accordingly. Ijaz Yousaf, Additional Advocate‑General Balochistan with M.W.N. Kohli, Advocate‑ on‑Record (absent) for Petitioner. Tariq Mehmood, Advocate Supreme Court for the Complainant. Nemo for Respondent. Date of hearing: 14th December, 1994. MUKHTAR AHMAD JUNEJO, J.‑‑‑The State seeks leave to appeal against acquittal of respondent Khuda‑i‑Dad by the High Court of Balochistan under a judgment dated 3‑3‑1994. The respondent was tried with seven others for the murder of Abdul Wahab on 1‑7‑1991 at 7‑15 p.m. at Chaman. At conclusion of the trial the respondent alongwith Abdul Khaliq appellant in Criminal Appeal No.113/94 was convicted for offence under section 302/34, P.P.C. and was awarded the sentence of life imprisonment and payment of Rs. five lacs as fine. Both, the respondent as well as Abdul Khaliq challenged their conviction and sentence in the High Court of Balochistan. A learned Division Bench of said High Court under a judgment dated 3‑3‑1994 acquitted the respondent while maintained conviction of Abdul Khaliq. Hence this petition for leave to appeal against acquittal of the respondent. After hearing the learned counsel appearing in Criminal Appeal No.113/94, we have accepted the same and have set aside the conviction and sentence of Abdul Khaliq. The case of respondent Khuda‑i‑Dad stands on better footing and he appears to have been rightly acquitted. Consequently we dismiss this petition. Such short order was passed on 14‑12‑1994 and these are reasons for the same. N. H. Q./S‑911/S Leave refused.