Insanity
Insanity legal meaning, translation and judicial precedents.
Meaning & Judicial Interpretation: (اردو مفہوم اور قانونی تشریح)
Epilepsy-History and description of disease-Person suffering from epilepsy- Whether an insane and not responsible for his acts-Determination.-[Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 84.-Insanity].
Epilepsy ; definition, description and history of-Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 302
S. 84-Insanity-Burden of proof-Crucial point of time at which unsoundness of mind to be established-Time when act constituting offence is committed
Burden of proving entitlement to benefit of exemption-Lies on accused.
S. 12-Insanity-Burden of proof on party putting forward plea of insanity, normal presumption being of sanity.
"Insanity", Pakistan Law Portal, available at: https://paklawportal.com/words-terms-maxims/2802
Precedents & Case Laws citing "Insanity"
1983 P Cr
MUNSHI KHAN‑Appellant Versus THE STATE‑Respondent
Court: Supreme Court (A J & K)P 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.1988 C L C 1122
ALTAFUR REHM AN‑‑Appellant Versus MASOOD AHMED KHAN and others‑‑Respondents
Court: KarachiP L D 1976 Lahore 805
MUHAMMAD NAWAZ‑Appellant Versus Tim STATE‑Respondent
Court: 5. 302 read with S. 84‑Insanity‑Legal insanity contemplated by S.84‑Different from medical insanity‑Evidence of premeditation or design or evidence that accused after commission of offence tried to resist arrest or ran away‑Held, negatives plea of insanity‑Burden of proof that his case falls within exception under S. 84 lies on accused‑Discharge of such burden‑Not inconsistent with rule of "unreasonable doubt"‑Evidenea Act (I of 1872), S. 105. Insanity Burdvn of proof.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.1975 P Cr
MAHBOOB ZAMAN Applicant Versus THE STATE‑Respondent
Court: Lahore1973 P Cr
ALI MUHAMMAD-Accused-Appellant Versus THE STATE-Respondent
Court: Lahore1985 M L D 813
ABDUL GHAFFAR — Appellant Versus THE STATE — Respondent
Court: Lahore