Find a Lawyer

Every Lawyer listed in this directory is verified by SJP verification Team

✓ Free WhatsApp lawyer help
Need to speak to a lawyer now?

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.

💬 Instant WhatsApp chat ⚖ Verified lawyer directory ⏰ Replies in minutes

GHULAM RAZAAQ SHAH versus STATE


Article 185 (3) was read with the Code of Conduct (XLV of 1860), Sections 366 and 376, for solicitors of abduction rape applicants only wishing to restore the evidence. \ ine confinement and intercourse without his consent

1983 S C M R 38

Present : Aslam Riaz Hussain and Muhammad Afzal Zullah, JJ

GHULAM RAZAAQ SHAH‑Petitioner

Versus

THE STATE‑Respondent

Criminal Petition for Leave to Appeal No. 103 of 1982, decided on 27th 1982.

(On appeal from the judgment of the Lahore High Court, dated 3rd February, 1982 in Cr. R. 571/81).

Constitution of Pakistan (1973)-‑

--Art. 185(3) read with Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 366 & 376‑ Abduction‑Rape‑Petitioner's counsel only wishing to reappraise evidence‑Petitioner (a peer) alleged to have used his influence on prosecutrix, deceitfully abducting her, keeping her in ''confinement and subjecting her to sexual intercourse without her consent No ground made out for reappraisal of evidence‑Case, held, not fit for interference by way of granting leave to appeal.‑‑[Abduction Rape].

Ch. Ghulam Mujtaba, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.

Date of hearing : 27th April, 1982.

ORDER

ASLAM RIAZ HUSSAIN, J.‑‑‑

.The petitioner seeks Leave to Appeal against the judgment of the Lahore High Court dated 3‑2‑1982 dismissing the petitioner's criminal appeal in a case under section 366/376, P .P. C.

2. The allegation against the petitioner, who is a peer is that he misused his influence on the prosecutrix Mst. Rasoolan, deceitfully abducted her, and took her to Burewala. He kept her in confinement for five months during which period he also subjected her to sexual intercourse without her consent. The trial Court convicted him for the said offence. It sentenced him to three years' R. I. and a fine of Rs. 2,000, under section 366, P. P. C. or in default six months' R. I. and four years' R. 1. with a fine of Rs. 2,000 under section 376, P. P. C. and in default six months' R. 1.

His appeal was dismissed by the High Court vide the impugned judg ment.

Hence the present petition.

3. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner. He only wants us to reappraise the evidence for which he had not made out any go ground. We do not consider this a fit case for interference by way of grant ing Leave to Appeal. The petition is consequently dismissed.

Petition dismissed.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.

🔍 Find a Lawyer
Popular cities: Lahore· Karachi· Islamabad· Rawalpindi· Multan· Faisalabad
tax advocates from FR Kohat lawyer

SJP Lawyers DirectorySJP Lawyers Directory

Pakistan's leading legal-technology platform and verified lawyer directory — connecting clients, lawyers, law firms and Bar Associations across the country.

Get in Touch

© 2018–2027 SJP Legnocrats (SMC-Private) Limited. All rights reserved.
Talk to a Lawyer Free · replies in minutes
👋 Need a lawyer? Chat with us free on WhatsApp now.