Case Details

Citation(s)
2004 SLG 850 2004 SLD 850 2004 SCMR 212
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Petition for Leave to Appeal No.490-L of 2002, decision dated: 10-12-2002.(On appeal from the order dated 6-2-2002 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 1255 of 2000 by the Lahore High Court, Lahore)
TANVIR AHMED KHAN, KHALIL-UR-REHMAN RAMDAY AND FALAK SHER, JJ
Ibne Hassan, Advocate Supreme Court with Muhammad Aslam Chaudhry, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner. Nemo for the State

NASIR

VS

THE STATE

Law:

Section:

Penal Code (XLV of 1860)---Ss.324/109/337-A(i)(ii)/337-F(ii)(vi)---Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)---Prosecution witnesses including the injured witness had proved the prosecution case to the hilt---Delay in registering the F.I.R. had been amply explained---Ocular testimony was totally in line with medical evidence---No illegality or misreading in the assessment of the prosecution evidence in returning the verdict of guilt was pointed out---High Court had already given concession to the accused by ordering his sentences to ' run concurrently instead of consecutively--- Impugned did not deserve any interference---Leave to appeal was declined to accused accordingly. ORDER TANVIR AHMED KHAN, J.---Leave to appeal is sought against the judgment dated 6-2-2002 whereby Criminal Appeal No. 1255 of 2000 filed by the petitioner was dismissed by the learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, with some modification in sentences, earlier passed by the learned trial Magistrate through his judgment dated 26-7-2000. 2. Facts briefly are that F.I.R. No.88 dated 23-3-1996 was got registered at Police Station Sillan Wali of District Sargohda under sections 324/109/337-A(i)(ii)/337-F(ii)(vi), P.P.C. at the instance of Ahmad Sher son of Kameer. It was the case of the complainant that he alongwith his brother Muhammad Khan and Ahmad Sher son of Muhammad Khan were going towards the Dera of Muhammad Khan Dhudhi at 7-30 p.m. When they reached near Railway track, suddenly the petitioner appeared armed with a pistol and caused injuries to complainant's brother Muhammad Khan. The case was investigated and challan was submitted before the learned Judicial Magistrate Section 30, Sargodha against the petitioner and one Allah Rakha. The prosecution, in order to establish its case; examined seven witnesses. The petitioner when examined under section 342, Cr.P.C., denied his participation. The learned trial Magistrate, after thrashing the entire evidence, acquitted the co-accused Allah Rakha and convicted the petitioner with different terms and sentences of rigorous imprisonment for causing injuries on the person of the said- Muhammad Khan, vide judgment dated…
🔒
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