Home Maxims & Terms Constructive liability meaning in Urdu
Legal Term Pakistani Jurisprudence Reference

Constructive liability

Constructive liability legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.

Meaning & Judicial Interpretation: (اردو مفہوم اور قانونی تشریح)

2012 PCrLJ 690 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH Judicial Precedent
S. 497BailConstructive liability

Court on the basis of material placed, such as F.I.R. and statements recorded by the Police, even at bail stage, could consider the question whether the case of constructive" liability was made out or not

Paramount consideration was whether accused was a member of a unlawful assembly or whether the offence had been committed in furtherance of the common object.

Sponsored Content / تشہیری مواد
How to cite this page: "Constructive liability", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/124933934

Precedents & Case Laws citing "Constructive liability"

PLD 1986
Criminal Appeals Nos. 16 and 39 of 1984, heard on 25th March, 1986.

P L D 1986 Peshawar 123

MUKARRAM‑Appellant Versus THE STATE‑Respondent

Court:
SCMR 1981
Criminal Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 457 of 1978, decided on 26th November 1979.

1981 S C M R 1092

MUNAWAR-Petitioner Versus THE STATE-Respondent

Court: S.497/498-Bail-Murder-case-Contention that a person who does not cause injuries to deceased cannot be burdened with constructive liability at time of considering question of nail-Held : Not correct Conditions set out in provision of law spelling out constructive liability accused concerned can be said to be guilty of an offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life.
PCRLJ 2008
2008-June-17

2008 P Cr

MUHAMMAD IMRAN and others — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent

Court: Lahore
PLD 1978
Criminal Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 229 of 1978, decided on 20th July 1978.

P L D 1978 Supreme Court 236

Present : Anwarul Haq, C. J., Karam EYahee Chauhan and Nasim Hasan Shah, JJ Versus THE STATE AND ANOTHER‑Respondents

Court: 5. 497(1)‑Bail‑Vicarious liability‑Petitioner found to be a member of unlawful assembly sharing common intention with others alleged to have caused death of victim of assault‑M, holly immaterial if another victim of assault sustained only a simple injury‑Complain ant party waylaid by accused persons killing one of them and peti tioner armed with gun firing in alleged attack and injuring a prose cution witness‑Petitioner, held, vicariously responsible for major offences and his case covered by S. 497(1), Cr. P. C.‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 302/307/149/148.‑Vicarious liability.
PCRLJ 1992
Criminal Miscellaneous No.15 of 1989, decided on 20th September, 1989

1992 P Cr

GUL RAZA‑‑‑Petitioner Versus THE STATE and 2 others‑‑‑Respondents

Court: Peshawar
PCRLJ 1982
Criminal Bail Application No. 26 of 1982, decided on 31st January, 1982.

1982 P Cr

FARYAD‑Applicant/Accused Versus THE STATE‑Respondent

Court: Karachi
SCMR 1978
Criminal Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 383 of 1976, decided on 17th October 1977.

1978 S C M R 45

ABDUR RASHID AND ANOTHER-Petitioners Versus THE STATE -Respondent

Court: -- Ss. 302/149, 324/149, 323/149 & 148-Murder-case -Sentence Accused appellant R armed with a spear but no spear blow found on any one of two deceased-F. I. R. showing accused R having given blow with his spear only to a prosecution witness and not to any deceased-Accused R in circumstances, held, could be held responsible for murders only on basis of constructive, liability and sentence of transportation for life proper sentence-Accused J armed with gandasa but no gandasa injury found on person of deceased M-Accused J in circumstances, held, could he held responsible for murder of M only on basis of constructive liability and liable for a sentence of transportation for life-Accused J, however, striking deceased R with gandasa and gandaia injury on R's head proved by doctor, accused J having struck R with a formidable weapon on head, held, intended to cause death and rightly awarded sentence of death. Sentence.
MLD 2011
2011-May-6

2011 M L D 1171

MULO AHMED — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent

Court: Karachi
MLD 1987
Criminal Miscellaneous No.288 and Criminal Bail Application No.670 of 1987, decided on 25th June, 1987.

1987 M L D 3290

MUHAMMAD YUNIS — Applicant Versus THE STATE — Respondent

Court: Karachi
MLD 2003
2003-March-25

2003 M L D 1191

SHARBAT and another — Petitioners Versus THE STATE — Respondent

Court: Karachi