| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1971 SLG 3166 1971 SLD 3166 = 1971 PCRLJ 1075 |
Lahore High Court
Criminal Revision No. 736 of 1970, decided on 5th November 1970
Presented By: Muhammad Afzal Zullah, J
Ch. Karam Elahi Bhatti for Petitioner. S. M. Nasim for
Respondents.
Criminal Revision No. 736 of 1970, decided on 5th November 1970
Presented By: Muhammad Afzal Zullah, J
Ch. Karam Elahi Bhatti for Petitioner. S. M. Nasim for
Respondents.
SADIQ MASIH-Petitioner
VERSUS
GHULAM MOHAYUDDIN AND ANOTHER-Respondents
Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)
Section: 302
Penal Code (XLV of 1860) S. 320 Words "any member" used in S. 320-Mean a limb or organ of human body capable of performing a distinct function-Mere use of expression "technically grievous" by doctor--Cannot make injury "grievous" if no permanent impairment or privation of affected limb resulted. The expression "any member" used in clauses fourthly and fifthly in section 320, P. P. C., historically speaking refer to the old offence of Mayhem and Hawkins defined it to be `violently depriving any other of the use of such of his members as may render him less able .in fighting either to defend himself. or to annoy his adversary'. (See 1 Hawk P. C. III, IV Black 205.) The term "member" as used in the Code means a limb or an organ being a part of man, capable of performing a distinct 6ffiee. As such it may include both eyes, ears, nose, mouth, hand and feet. It is the privation of any of these limbs or organs or the destruction or permanent impairment of their powers that has been made punishable as grievous hurt under the Code. It is in this sense that the expression `member' has to be interpreted, as it is used in section 320, P. P. C. Date of hearing : 5th November 1970. ORDER Sadiq Masih; Ziledar, Section Harpoke, Sheikhupura Division, has by this revision petition called in question the order of a learned Magistrate whereby Ghulam Mohay-ud-Din and Sana Ullah respondents have been charged for offences under sections 332/ 109 and 332, P. P. C. The petitioner who is the complainant in the case claims that he suffered a grievous hurt, therefore, the charge should have been under section 333, P. P. C., In this revision petition, grievance was, also made with regard to the failure of the Magistrate to charge the respondents under sections 364 and 466, P. P. C. but the learned counsel for the petitioner has not pressed that part of the petition. 2. - In support of the contention that the petitioner suffered a grievous hurt in so far as the injury to his eye is concerned, the learned counsel for the petitioner has read certain portions of the medical evidence. It is true that, according to the…