1990 PLP 284 (SCMR)
THE STATE‑‑Petitioner Versus ABDUL MAJEED‑‑Respondent
| Citation | 1990 PLP 284 (SCMR) |
| Forum / Court | High Court |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Afzal Zullah, Ghulam Mujaddid |
| Parties | THE STATE‑‑Petitioner Versus ABDUL MAJEED‑‑Respondent |
| Primary Law | Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑ |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1990 PLP 284 (SCMR)?
This judgment primarily cites: Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑‑ as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1990 PLP 284 (SCMR)?
The case was heard and decided by the High Court bench comprising: Muhammad Afzal Zullah, Ghulam Mujaddid.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 1990 PLP 284 (SCMR) (THE STATE‑‑Petitioner Versus ABDUL MAJEED‑‑Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Nemo for Respondent.
- Date of hearing: 18th June, 1989.
- M. Akhtar, Additional Advocate‑General (Punjab) with M. A. Bajwa, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Rao Muhammad Yousaf Khan, Advocate‑on‑Record for the State.
- GHULAM MUJADDID, J.‑‑Learned Additional Advocate‑General appearing in support of this petition on behalf of the State relied on the observation made by this Court in Criminal Petition for Leave to Appeal No. 193 of 1984 and submitted that the sentence altered by the High Court was neither legal nor proper.
Headnotes / Summary
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the Lahore High Court Bahawalpur Bench, Bahawalpur dated 19th May, 1984 in Criminal Appeal No.116 of 1974/BWP). ‑‑‑Art.185(3)‑‑‑Leave to appeal‑‑‑Contention that sentence altered by High Court was neither legal nor proper‑‑‑Leave to appeal granted to consider the question of inadequacy of sentence. Criminal Petition for Leave to Appeal No. 193 of 1984 ref. M. Akhtar, Additional Advocate‑General (Punjab) with M. A. Bajwa, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Rao Muhammad Yousaf Khan, Advocate‑on‑Record for the State.
Judgment & Decree
‑‑‑Art.185(3)‑‑‑Leave to appeal‑‑‑Contention that sentence altered by High Court was neither legal nor proper‑‑‑Leave to appeal granted to consider the question of inadequacy of sentence. Criminal Petition for Leave to Appeal No. 193 of 1984 ref. M. Akhtar, Additional Advocate‑General (Punjab) with M. A. Bajwa, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Rao Muhammad Yousaf Khan, Advocate‑on‑Record for the State. Nemo for Respondent. Date of hearing: 18th June, 1989. GHULAM MUJADDID, J.‑‑Learned Additional Advocate‑General appearing in support of this petition on behalf of the State relied on the observation made by this Court in Criminal Petition for Leave to Appeal No. 193 of 1984 and submitted that the sentence altered by the High Court was neither legal nor proper. We grant leave to appeal to consider the question of inadequacy of the sentence. MA.K./S‑429/S Leave granted.