Case Details

Citation(s)
1980 SLG 3030 = 1980 SLD 3030 = 1980 SCMR 307

Criminal Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 72-R of 1979, decided on 3rd October, 1979. (On appeal from the judgment and order of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, dated 11-7-1979, in Cr. A. No. 4591177).
Presented By:  G. Safdar Shah and Karam Elahee Chauhan, JJ
Agha Aziz Ahmad, Advocate Supreme Court and Ch. Akhtar Ali, Advocateon Record for Petitioner. Nemo for the State.

ASLAM PERVAIZ-Petitioner

VERSUS

THE STATE-Respondent

Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

Section: 302

Penal Code (XLV of 1860) S. 302 [Murdercase] Copious evidence on record to establish guilt of petitionerEvidence minutely scrutinised by Courts belowNo violation of any principle of law in matter of appreciation of evidence warranting interference by Supreme CourtPetition dis missed[Evidence]. Date of hearing : 3rd October, 1979.                                                                                                                                   ORDER KARAM ELAHEE CHAUHAN, J.The petitioner was tried and convicted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rawalpindi, by means of his judgment and order dated 16th April, 1977, for an offence under , sec tion 302, P. P. C. for the murder of Muhammad Farooq and sentenced to imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 2,000 or in default to undergo further R. I. for one year. Out of the fine if realized 2/3rd was directed to be paid as compensation to the legal heirs of the deceased. The peti tioner was also convicted under section 13 of the West Pakistan Arms Ordinance XX of 1965 and was awarded R. 1. for six months. Both these sentences were to run concurrently. 2. The petitioner filed two appeals, one against his conviction under section 302, P. P. C. and the other for his conviction under the Arms Ordinance. Both these appeals failed and were rejected by a learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court on 11th July, 1979. 3. The petitioner has come up in a petition for special leave to appeal against the same to this Court. 4. The facts of the prosecution case are that the petitioner and the deceased Muhammad Farooq were employed in a factory in Mohallah Akalgarh, Rawalpindi. In the neighbour hood of that factory was the house of one Muhammad Rafiq. The accused and the deceased used to visit that house and both had a fancy for and were carrying on romance with Mst. Tasleem Akhtar (C. W.…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register