| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1981 SLG 3074 = 1981 SLD 3074 = 1981 PLD 83 |
Lahore High Court
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 1 of 1980 and Criminal Appeal No. 984 of 1979, decided on 25th March, 1980.
Presented By: Muhammad Hassan Sindher, J
Abdul Ghaffar v. Anwarul Hassan 1978 S C M R 149 ref Sh. Zameer Hussain far Applicant/Appellant. Muhammad Anwar Khokhar for A. -G for the State.
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 1 of 1980 and Criminal Appeal No. 984 of 1979, decided on 25th March, 1980.
Presented By: Muhammad Hassan Sindher, J
Abdul Ghaffar v. Anwarul Hassan 1978 S C M R 149 ref Sh. Zameer Hussain far Applicant/Appellant. Muhammad Anwar Khokhar for A. -G for the State.
MUHAMMAD RAFIQUE-Petitioner
VERSUS
THE STATE-Respondent
Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)
Section: 300
Law: Civil Procedure Code (V of 1908)
Section: 426
Penal Code (XLV of 1860) S. 300, Exception 1 read with Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898),. S.426--Grant of bail pending appeal--[Murder-case]--Contention that sentence imposed on accused may call for suitable interferengo by High Court, held, justifies demand for exercise of discretion in favour of accused, if case accepted to fall under Exception I to S. 3011, P. P. C.--­Bail allowed, in circumstance. JUDGMENT In a nutshell, Muhammad Rafique appellant was tried alongwith his father Abdul Hameed for the murder of Mazhar Ali d sed under section 302/34 said to have been committed by them in furtherance of common intention on the allegations that the appellant had at 10/11-00 p.m. on the night of incident taken the deceased from Hujra f one Sher Rehman on the pretext that the appellant had some business with the deceased. Riaz Hussain and Rafaqat Hussain (P. W. 6/7) who were also present in the Hujra accompanied the appellant and the deceased to the house of the former. The father of the appellant was already inside the house and exhorted the appellant to do away with the deceased, for he had brought insult to them. The appellant and his father caused one injury each to the deceased in the chest and abdomen with chhuris. The appellant as well as his father repudiated the charge as false. However, the appel­lant admitted that he had stabbed the deceased with a different version that the .deceased had tresspassed into his house at midnight to commit rape on his wife Mst. Zareena. Ire had killed the deceased in exercise of his right of private defence of body. 2. Learned Additional Sessions Judge before whom trial was he)# rejected the prosecution case with the finding that the story put forth by the prosecution did not appeal to common sense. The occurrence had…