1986 P Cr (PLP)
SHANOO and others Appellants Versus THE STATE Respondent
| Citation | 1986 P Cr (PLP) |
| Forum / Court | Lahore |
| Bench Members | Muhammad Munir Khan, J |
| Parties | SHANOO and others Appellants Versus THE STATE Respondent |
| Primary Law | Penal Code (XLV of 1860) |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1986 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 1986 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: 1986 P Cr (PLP) (SHANOO and others Appellants Versus THE STATE Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- Mian Muhammad Akram Ranjha for Appellants.
- Date of hearing: 10th December, 1985.
Headnotes / Summary
‑‑‑Ss. 307/34 & 324/34‑‑Nature of offence‑‑Injury in abdomen declared simple‑‑Mere fact that injury was caused on vital part of body, held, would not make case of murderous assault‑‑Conviction and sentence was, therefore, altered to one under S‑ 324/34, Penal Code. Mian Muhammad Bashir for the State.
Judgment & Decree
Mian Muhammad Akram Ranjha for Appellants. Mian Muhammad Bashir for the State. Date of hearing: 10th December, 1985. This Criminal Appeal arises from the judgment of learned Magistrate, Section 30, Chiniot, whereby he on 29‑9‑1984 convicted Shano and Falak Sher appellants under section 307/34, P.P.C. and sentenced them to five years' R.I. and a fine of Rs.5,000 in default thereof six months' R.I.
2. The learned counsel while conceding the allegations that Falak Sher had caught hold of the victim Muhammad P.W. 2 and Shano appellant had caused him injury in the abdomen, the learned counsel has challenged the nature of the offence. He maintained that since the injury caused by Shanoo appellant was found simple, therefore, the appellants could not have been convicted under section 307/34, P.P.C. Consequently the learned counsel for the State has supported the judgment of the trial Court.
3. I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties with care. I feel inclined to agree with the learned counsel for the appellants inasmuch as I find that the injury allegedly caused by Shanoo has been declared simple. The mere fact that the injury was inflicted on the vital part of the body would not make it a case of murderous assault punishable under section 307/34, P.P.C. That being the position the conviction of the appellants under section A 307/34, P.P.C., is set aside and instead they are convicted under section 324/34, P.P.C., and sentenced to two years' R.I. and a fine of Rs.5,000 in default thereof six months' R.I. each. The fine when recovered be paid to Muhammad P.W. 2 (injured witness) as compensation. S.A. Conviction /sentence altered.