Case Details

Citation(s)
2006 SLG 2784 2006 SLD 2784 2006 SCMR 1755 2006 PLJ 1215
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Petition No.143 of 2006, decision dated: 21-06-2006 (Against the judgment, dated 12-4-2006 passed by the Lahore High Court, Lahore, in Criminal Appeal No.971 and Murder Reference No.405 of 2000)
FAQIR MUHAMMAD KHOKHAR, JUSTICE, M. JAVED BUTTAR, JUSTICE, CH. IJAZ AHMAD, JUSTICE
Sardar Asmatuliah Khan, Advocate Supreme Court and Arshad Ali Chaudhry, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner. Nemo for the State.

ERS: KHIZAR HAYAT

VS

THE STATE

Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860

Section: 34,84,302

Law: Pakistan Penal Code, 1860

Section: 34,84,302

Law: Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984)

Section: 121

(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)-------S. 84---Qanun-e-Shahadat (10 of 1984), Art.121---Unsound mind---Onus to prove---Presumption---Not every person, who is mentally diseased, is ipso facto, exempted from criminal liability---Any person who seeks benefit of S.84 P.P.C. must prove that at the time of committing the act, he was labouring under such defect of reason as not knowing the nature and quality of the act he was doing---Until the contrary is proved, every man is presumed to be sane and possessed of a sufficient degree of reasons to be responsible for his actions, as such the same principle follows from Art.121 of Qanun-e-Shahadat, 1984, which provides that the burden of proving that the case of an accused person falls within such exception is on him. Mst. Shamshad v. The State 1998 SCMR 854; Juma Khan v. The State PLD 2003 Lah. 60; The State v. Balahar Das PLD 1962 Dacca 467; Dewa Ram v. Emperor AIR 1937 Lah. 486; Jamshaid Beg v. Muhammad Iqbal and another 1988 SCMR 855; Allah Wadhayo and another v. The State 2001 SCMR 25; Baswantrao Bajirao v. Emperor AIR 1949 Nag. 66 and Mani Ram v. Emperor AIR 1927 Lah. 52 rel. (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--- ----S. 84---Sanity---"Medical" and "legal" standards---Distinction---Medical and legal standards of sanity are not identical---From medical point of view it is probably correct to say that every man at the time when he commits a murder is insane, that is, he is not in sound healthy normal condition; from legal point of view a man must be held to be sane so long as he is able to distinguish between right and wrong, so long as he knows that the offence he is committing is a wrong thing to do, so long as he has a guilty mind---Medical expert would, at the most, furnish the Court with a data about the existence, character and the extent of mental disease---Job of Court, thereafter, is to see whether accused was legally insane at the time of commission of crime or not---Question as to whether accused was insane at the time of occurrence so as to attract the application of S.84 P.P.C. is a question of fact to be decided on the facts of that case. Dewa Ram v. Emperor AIR 1937 Lah. 486; Pappathi Ammal's case AIR 1959 Mad.…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492