Lawyers Directory Listing
Chat with us free on WhatsApp — tell us your city and legal matter and our team connects you with the right lawyer. No form, no fee.
Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 296 of 11967, decided on 6th December 1967.
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the High Court of West Pakistan, Lahore, dated the 12th October 1967, in Criminal Appeal No. 639 of 1966/Murder Reference No. 159 of 1966).
S. 300, Exception 1‑Grave and sudden provocation‑Accused, on pretext that one of deceased looked into courtyard of their house, seizing spears and dang and pursuing deceased to his house beating him and his father to death‑Accused's wall not so high as to prevent passer‑by from seeing most of courtyard‑Accused's objection and their further action to enj6rce it, held, acts of extreme high handedness‑No case of provocation made out‑Special leave to appeal refused by Supreme Court.
Aftab Farrukh, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by M. Sarjees Nagi, Attorney for Petitioners.
Nemo for the State
Date of hearing : 6th December 1967.
‑The case against the three petitioners, for which they stand convicted for murder, is that on the pretext that the deceased Majid bad given offence by looking into the court yard of their house, they seized weapons, namely two spears and' a dang and pursued Majid to his house, a short distance away, where they beat him and his father Din Muhammad so that they died.
The evidence is clear. Mr. Aftab Farrukh attempted to make out a case of grave and sudden provocation, on the basis that Majid had been seen trying to have a look at the wife of one of the petitioners as she was taking a bath in her courtyard behind a cot. This plea was raised in the accused's statements, but there is no affirmative evidence in support. All suggestions to this effect put to prosecution witnesses were denied by them.
In the circumstances, the motivation for the savage assault remains as, put in the initial report, that the accused persons objected to Majid deceased looking into their courtyard at all. The wall was merely four feet to height, and a passer‑by could not be prevented from seeing most of the courtyard. The objection and the further action to enforce it were acts of extreme high handedness. No case of provocation is made out.
We dismiss this petition.
Petition dismissed.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer