1993 PLP 694 (SCMR)
KHUSHI MUHAMMAD ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus STATE and 3 others‑‑‑Respondents
| Citation | 1993 PLP 694 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | Supreme Court of Pakistan |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Afzal Zullah, CJ., |
| Parties | KHUSHI MUHAMMAD ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus STATE and 3 others‑‑‑Respondents |
| Primary Law | Penal Code (XLV of 1860)‑‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1993 PLP 694 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)‑‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1993 PLP 694 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the Supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Muhammad Afzal Zullah, CJ.,.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1993 PLP 694 (SCMR) (KHUSHI MUHAMMAD ‑‑‑Petitioner Versus STATE and 3 others‑‑‑Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Ch. Muhammad Ashraf Azeem, Advocate Supreme Court with Muhammad Aslam Chaudhry, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
- Kh. Sultan Ahmad, Senior Advocate Supreme Court and S Abdul Asim Jafry, Advocate‑on‑Record for Respondents Nos.2 and 3.
- Nemo for Respondent No.4.
- Date of hearing: 25th October, 1992.
- M. Akhtar, Add A.‑G. Punjab, Abdul Samad Hashmi, Advocate Supreme Court and Rao Muhammad Yousaf Khan, Advocate‑on‑Record for the State.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment of the Lahore High Court, Lahore dated 22‑4‑1991 in Cr. Revision No.662 of 1989). ‑‑‑‑S.302‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art 185(3)‑‑‑Leave to appeal was granted to examine whether the evidence of eye‑witnesses who had no motive for false implication of accused had been rejected by Courts below without any justification and the admission of accused in their bail application regarding death of deceased by their firing was not adverted to by them. M. Akhtar, Add A.‑G. Punjab, Abdul Samad Hashmi, Advocate Supreme Court and Rao Muhammad Yousaf Khan, Advocate‑on‑Record for the State.
Judgment & Decree
MUHAMMAD RAFIQ TARAR, J.‑‑‑This petition for leave to appeal by Khushi Muhammad complainant is directed against the judgment of a learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court dated 22‑4‑1991 whereby his Revision Petition calling in question the acquittal of the respondents of the charge under section 302, P.P.C., was dismissed.
2. The case of the prosecution was that on 30‑7‑1988 at 11‑00 a.m. the respondents namely Idrees armed with a gun, Muhammad Hussain armed with stick and their father Bashir Ahmad empty‑handed confronted Zulfiqar deceased when he was going to his house in the company of his father Khushi Muhammad and brother Sifat Elahi. On the Lalkara of Bashir Ahmad, Idrees respondent fired a shot hitting ZuIfiqar on the left blank, and Muhammad Hussain gave him stick blows on the back of his chest. He was removed to the hospital where he succumbed to his injuries soon after.
3. At the trial Khushi Muhammad complainant and Zafar P.W.7 supported the prosecution version. The prosecution also relied on the evidence relating to the motive and recoveries.
4. The respondents pleaded not guilty to the charge and denied the prosecution allegations against them. No evidence was led in defence.
5. The trial Court disbelieved the prosecution evidence and acquitted the respondents of the charge. The finding was upheld by the High Court.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the eye‑witnesses had no motive for false implication and their evidence has been rejected by the Courts below without any justification. He further submits that the respondents had admitted in their bail application that the deceased was killed by their firing but this aspect was not adverted to by the Courts below. He seeks A permission for production of additional evidence to prove that said admission. He, however, does not press the petition against Bashir Ahmad respondent.
7. After going through the record we feel that the submissions made by the learned counsel required examination. Accordingly leave is granted against Muhammad Idrees and Muhammad Hussain respondents but the petition in so far as it relates to 19ashir Ahmad respondent is dismissed without prejudice o the case of aforesaid respondents on this ground.
8. Bailable warrants be issued against Muhammad Idrees and Muhammad Hussain respondents for appearance in this Court in the sum of Rs.10,000 each with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of A.C., Kasur.
9. The petitioner may file an application for additional evidence on question of admission through lawyer at bail stage. The Appeal Bench will decide the question of admissibility or otherwise of the alleged admission. Copy of the application alongwith proposed evidence shall be given to the learned counsel for the respondents. N.H.Q./K‑206/S Leave granted.