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.
Criminal Petition No. 44-R of 1981, decided on 28th June, 1981.
(On appeal from the judgment of Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench, dated 12-5-1981 in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 1 of 1981 in Criminal App.No. 67 of 1981).
---- Ss. 410 & 426-Appeal to High Court-Suspension of sentence pending final disposal of appeal-Appellant's request for suspension of sentence pending final disposal of appeal rejected-Contention that witnesses should not have been believed implicitly for reason of they hav ing been named as accused in counter case-Held: Pleas relate to merits of case and have to be appreciated at regular hearing of appeal and High Court's order refusing to suspend sentence having not violated any provision or principle of law does not call for any interference- Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3).
Sh. Naveed Shaharyar, Advocate and Ch. Akhtar Ali, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner.
Date of hearing : 28th June, 1981.
The two petitioners stand convicted and sentenced under section 307/34, P. P. C. to five years' R. 1. and fine of Rs. 1,000 each. Their request for suspension of the sentences awarded to them pending final disposal of the appeal filed before the Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench, was refused by a learned Single Judge in the High Court for the reason that the victim in the incident, namely, Muhammad Nawaz and two other prosecution witnesses who claimed to have witnessed the occurrence and who have been believed by the trial Court attributed the specific part to the two petitioners of having used their fire-arms which caused the injuries on the victim.
Shaikh Naveed Shaharyar, learned counsel appearing iii support of this petition for special leave to appeal from the order of the learned Single Judge of the High Court submits that the alleged eye-witnesses should not have been implicitly believed for the reason that they were named as accused persons in the counter case.
This plea as well as the others raised by the learned counsel relate to the merits of the case, and are to be appreciated at the regular hearing of the appeal. The order passed by the learned Single Judge of the High Court refusing to grant petitioners' request for suspension of the sentence awarded to them by the trial Court does not violate any provision or principle of law, and does not therefore call for interference by this Court.
The petition is, therefore, dismissed in limine.
Petition dismissed.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer