Case Details

Citation(s)
1973 SLG 3108 = 1973 SLD 3108 = 1973 PCRLJ 824
Lahore High Court
Criminal Appeal No. 263 of 1971, decided on 1 nth July 1972.
Presented By: Mushtaq Hussain Munir, J
Gul Muhammad Khan for Appellants. Sh. Muhammad Islam for the State.

NAZAR ARID 4 OTHERS--Convict--Appellants,

VERSUS

THE STATE---Respondent

Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

Section: 307, 149, 148, 100

(a) Criminal trial-Benefit of doub6 Prosecution story full of improbabilities - Prosecution witnesses interested and related' inter se-Fight taking place in front of accused's house for about 15 minutes but none front neighbours cited as prosecution witness- Prosecution case, held, doubtful in circumstances-Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 307/149 & 148. (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 307/149, 148 & 100 Private defence, right of-Complainant party trying to trespass into accused's house to lift away his wife forcibly-Accused causing in juries to trespassers (P. Ws.) in order to rescue his wife from forcible abduction-Accused, held, acted in private defence of his wife's person-t and did not exceed such right Gul Muhammad Khan for Appellants. Dates of hearing : 26tb May and 4th July 1972.                                                                                                                                JUDGMENT Nazir, Nazeer, Sardar alias Dara, sons of Ali Muhammad, Mukhtar Ahmad, and Sadiq sons of Ghulam Muhammad, Jats of Chak No. 37/G. B., Police Station Satiana, District Lyallpur were tried by Khan Muhammad Masud Khan, Section 30 Magistrate, Jaranwala, under sections 148 and 307 read with section 149 of the Pakistan Penal Code. They were convicted on 3rd April 1971 and sentenced to one year's rigorous imprisonment each, under section 148, P. P. C. They were also convicted under section 307 read with section 149, P. P. C. and awarded five years' rigorous -imprisonment each and a fine of Rs. 500 each. In default of the payment of fine, they were directed to undergo further rigorous. imprisonment for a period of six months each. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. The convicts have come up in appeal. 2. The prosecution story, briefly, is that Mst. Balqis Begum, stated to be a cousin of…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register