1989 P Cr (PLP)
ABDUL QAYYUM‑Applicant Versus ZAHIR KHAN and another‑-Respondents
| Citation | 1989 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Karachi |
| Bench Members | Ajmal Mian and Abdul Razzak A. Thahim, JJ |
| Parties | ABDUL QAYYUM‑Applicant Versus ZAHIR KHAN and another‑-Respondents |
| Primary Law | Penal Code (XLV of 1860)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1989 P Cr (PLP)?
This judgment primarily cites: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1989 P Cr (PLP)?
The case was heard and decided by the Karachi bench comprising: Ajmal Mian and Abdul Razzak A. Thahim, JJ.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1989 P Cr (PLP) (ABDUL QAYYUM‑Applicant Versus ZAHIR KHAN and another‑-Respondents). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Abdul Ghafoor Mangi, Asstt. A.‑G. for Respondents.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑S.'302‑‑Accused was awarded life imprisonment by Trial Court instead of death sentence in murder case on ground that fight took place all of a sudden which was taken as a mitigating circumstance warranting lesser punishment‑‑Counsel for State submitted that it was not a fit case for issuing notice for enhancement of sentence‑‑Trial Court exercised discretion in favour of accused‑‑No compelling reasons existing for enhancement of sentence‑‑Interference declined by High Court‑‑Held, unless some compelling reasons were shown 'for enhancement of sentence, High Court would generally not issue notice for enhancement of sentence. Khawaja Naveed Ahmed for Applicant.
Judgment & Decree
AJMAL MIAN, J.‑‑ From the judgment,. it seems that the learned Sessions Judge has awarded life imprisonment instead of death sentence for the reasons that the fight was all of a sudden and the learned Sessions Judge thought that it was the mitigating circumstance warranting the awarding of the lesser punishment. In response to the Court notice Mr. Abdul Ghafoor Mangi, Assistant Advocate‑General also submits that it is not a fit case for issuing notice for enhancement of sentence. Whereas, Mr. Khawaja Naveed Ahmed, learned, counsel for the applicant contends that factually the accused has sufficient time to cool off after the quarrel and factually he went to his house to bring Chhurri and inflicted as many as 11 injuries. In our view, since the learned Sessions Judge has exercised discretion in favour of the accused and unless some compelling reasons) are shown for enhancement, the Court generally does not issue notice for enhancement for sentence.
2. The application is, therefore, dismissed in limine. M.Y.H./A‑410/K Petition dismissed.