Insanity, plea of
Insanity, plea of legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.
Meaning & Judicial Interpretation: (اردو مفہوم اور قانونی تشریح)
S. 466-Insanity, plea of-Plea of insanity having been raised with some material in its support public interest required examination of matter-Sessions Court proceeding to examine matter but dropping same on asking of petitioner's counsel-Matter relating to plea of insanity having not been finally concluded petitioner, if so advised, could still apply under. S. 466 and Court concerned, held, would be competent in view of gravity of matter either to act under subsection (1) or subsection (2) of S. 466, Criminal Procedure Code, 1898.
[Insanity].
"Insanity, plea of", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/14991
Precedents & Case Laws citing "Insanity, plea of"
1982 S C M R 754
MUHAMMAD NASEEM — Petitioner Versus THE STATE-Respondent
Court: ---S. 466-Insanity, plea of-Plea of insanity having been raised with some material in its support public interest required examination of matter-Sessions Court proceeding to examine matter but dropping same on asking of petitioner's counsel-Matter relating to plea of insanity having not been finally concluded petitioner, if so advised, could still apply under. S. 466 and Court concerned, held, would be competent in view of gravity of matter either to act under subsection (1) or subsection (2) of S. 466, Criminal Procedure Code, 1898.--Insanity.1984 P Cr
MUHAMMAD YAQOOB — Appellant Versus THE STATE — Respondent
Court: LahoreP L D 2002 Supreme Court 92
MEHRBAN alias MUNNA — Petitioner Versus THE STATE — Respondent
Court: High CourtP L D 1982 Karachi 360
DAD‑Appellant Versus The STATE‑Respondent
Court: S. 465‑Insanity, plea of‑No evidence on record to show accused insane at time of trial and as such incapable of making his defence Accused only raising plea of being insane at time of occurrence and incapable of knowing nature of his act‑Provision of S. 465, Cr. P. C., held, not attracted and trial Court not required to try fact of such madness and incapacity in first instance.‑Insanity.1985 M L D 600
GHULAM MUSTAFA — Appellant Versus THE STATE — Respondent
Court: Lahore1985 P Cr
ZAHOOR AHMAD Appellant Versus THE STATE Respondent
Court: Lahore1971 P Cr
AURANGZEB‑Appellant Versus THE STATE‑Respondent
Court: Karachi1987 P Cr
ABDUS SHAKOOR‑‑Appellant Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent
Court: LahoreP L D 1978 Karachi 295
MUHAMMAD ISMAIL‑Applicant Versus THE STATE‑Opponent
Court: ‑S. 302‑Murder‑case‑Three prosecution witnesses seeing incident, apprehending accused on spot, while accused trying to run away, and forthwith producing accused at nearby Police Outpost Injury inflicted on deceased sufficient in ordinary course of nature to cause death‑Held t Person causing deep injury, in abdomen so as to cut liver ordinarily presumed to have had intention of killing his victim. Intention.1986 M L D 1060
S. ASIF ALI‑‑Appellant Versus THE STATE‑‑Respondent
Court: Karachi