1988 P Cr (PLP)
ALLAH YAR‑‑Appellant Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1988 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Munir Khan, J |
| Parties | ALLAH YAR‑‑Appellant Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1988 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: statutory provisions as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1988 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Lahore bench comprising: Muhammad Munir Khan, J.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1988 P Cr (PLP) (ALLAH YAR‑‑Appellant Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Representation
- Shah Ahmad Khan Blouch for Appellant.
- Date of hearing: 30th March, 1988.
Headnotes / Summary
(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)‑‑ ‑‑‑S. 304, Part I‑‑Sentence‑‑Accused not challenging conviction but making prayer for showing leniency in sentence on ground of compromise reached between legal heirs of deceased and accused‑‑Widow of deceased appeared in Court and produced affidavit to the effect that she had adequately been compensated by accused party‑‑Sentence of accused reduced to one already undergone.‑‑[Compromise]. (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)‑‑ ‑‑‑S. 304, Part I‑‑Sentence‑‑Compromise between the parties, held, a recognised ground for reduction in sentence.‑‑[Compromise‑ Sentence]. Abul Fateh for the State.
Judgment & Decree
(b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)‑‑ ‑‑‑S. 304, Part I‑‑Sentence‑‑Compromise between the parties, held, a recognised ground for reduction in sentence.‑‑[Compromise‑ Sentence]. Shah Ahmad Khan Blouch for Appellant. Abul Fateh for the State. Date of hearing: 30th March, 1988. This Criminal Appeal arises from the judgment of learned Sessions Judge, Toba Tek Singh, whereby he on 29‑e‑1987 convicted Allah Yar appellant under section 304‑I, P.P.C. and sentenced him to 7 years' R.I,
2. Learned counsel for the appellant has not challenged the conviction of the appellant under section 304‑I, P.P.C. and rightly so because there is ample evidence in proof of the commission of an offence punishable under section 304‑I, P.P.C. against the appellant. Learned trial Court has properly appreciated the evidence and has given sound and cogent reasons for not convicting the accused under section 302, P.P.C. Learned counsel has requested for leniency in sentence on the ground of compromise between the legal heirs of the deceased and the appellant. Mst. Haleema Bibi, widow of the deceased Mulazim Hussain is present in the Court. She has produced affidavit to the effect that she has adequately been compensated by the appellant. The affidavit has been placed on record.
3. Since the compromise between the legal heirs of the decease and the appellant is a recognized ground for the reduction in sentence, therefore, in view of the sizable compensation in the shape of 1 Acres of agricultural land and a sum of Rs.45,000 received by legal heirs of the deceased, I feel inclined to reduce the sentence of the appellant from 7 years' R.I. to one year and seven months' R.I., which has already been undergone by him. He will be released) immediately, if not required to be detained in any other case. M.Y.H./A-308/L Order accordingly.