| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 1970 SLG 67 1970 SLD 67 1970 PLD 212 |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
Criminal Appeal No. 6-P of 1.968, decision dated: 3rd March 1970, hearing DATE : 10th February 1970
HAMOODUR RAHMAN, C.J., MUHAMMAD YAQUB ALI, SAJJAD AHMAD AND WAHIDUDDIN AHMAD, JJ
Masoom Shah, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Muhammad Nazar Khan, Senior Attorney for Appellants. Muhammad Abdullah Bajwa, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Ijaz Ali, Advocate-on-Record for the State
Criminal Appeal No. 6-P of 1.968, decision dated: 3rd March 1970, hearing DATE : 10th February 1970
HAMOODUR RAHMAN, C.J., MUHAMMAD YAQUB ALI, SAJJAD AHMAD AND WAHIDUDDIN AHMAD, JJ
Masoom Shah, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Muhammad Nazar Khan, Senior Attorney for Appellants. Muhammad Abdullah Bajwa, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Ijaz Ali, Advocate-on-Record for the State
SARDARAI AND ANOTHER
VS
THE STATE
Law:
Section:
(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 302-Conviction for murder-Special leave to appeal granted by Supreme Court to consider nature of offence in light of plea of private defence of property. (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 302. read with Ss. 99 & 104-Murder-Private defence, right of-Extent-Law does not permit a person under pretext of private defence of property to kill a man outright-Accused arriving at scene of occurrence with determination to kill deceased, without protesting or raising any objection about trespass of property by deceased, and shooting at him and killing him on land in dispute-Accused, held, acted far beyond' what law permitted him to do and cannot be permitted to claim that he acted in exercise of right of private defence and exceeded in it Conviction under S. 302/34 upheld. A landlord is not entitled to dispossess his tenant by force. He must obtain possession of his property in due course of law. If a landlord evicts his tenant without recourse to law, the tenant is entitled to resist his possession by force against him. If a tenant is dispossessed by his landlord and he does not acquiesce with that act, he is entitled to re-enter and re-instate himself but he should not use more force than is necessary. The law does not permit a person under the pretext of private defence of property to kill a man outright. Under section 99 of the Penal Code, the right of private defence does not extend to the causing of more harm than it is necessary to cause for the purpose of defence. Under section 104 of the Pakistan Penal Code the right of private defence is circumscribed by the limits mentioned in section 99 of the Code. The offence of criminal trespasser is a minor offence. In a case where the trespasser is un-armed and there is no threat of grievous injuries to the person who is resisting the trespass he is not entitled to use such force as may result in the killing of a person. If he does so he cannot claim that he was doing so in the right of his private defence and has exceeded in his right. In the present case, the evidence shows that the appellants arrived at the scene of occurrence with the determination to kill deceased. They did not…
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