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 for Leave to Appeal No. 24‑R (S) of 1992, decided on 13th December, 1982.
(On appeal from the judgment and order of the Federal Shariat Court, dated 22nd September, 1982, in Cr. A. 93‑I of 1982).
Constitution of Pakistan (1973)‑
----Art. 185 (3) read with Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 307 & 354 Attempt to murder‑Assault or criminal force to woman‑Conten tions of petitioner and perusal of material placed on record not making out a fit case for reappraisal of evidence‑No point of law involved in case‑Leave to appeal from judgment of Federal Shariat Court refused.
Malik Rab Nawaz Noon, Advocate Supreme Court and Ch. Akhtar Ali, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioner.
Nemo for the State.
Date of bearing : 13th December, 1982.
‑Leave to appeal has been sought from judgment dated 22‑9‑1982 of the Federal Sharit Court. The petitioner has challenged his conviction and sentence for offence under sections 307 and 354, P. P. C.
The accusation was that Mst. Karam Jan, complainant, whose father is a labourer, was residing close to the Kariana shop of the petitioner. One morning when she was coming to her house after easing herself, he tried to clasp her so as to induce her for Zina but she succeeded in running away. After some time when she had not yet narrated, this incident to her parents the petitioner repeated the attempt, caught her in a japhha and asked her to have illicit intercourse with him but she refused and resisted. Thereupon 22 blows were inflicted by him on her person with a knife. Her cries attracted Ahmad Khan (P. W.) and her mother, Mst. Malkani.
The defence plea at the trial was of denial and false implication; with the further explanation that the victim was injured during the night by other related persons though the rumour was that she was overrun by a truck, Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that although there is large number of injuries but there was no attempt to kill ; that the weapon recovered had a blade of 4 but all the injuries were skin deep ; that Ahmad Khan eye‑witness was not mentioned in the site plan ; that there should be a stronger motive for such a large number of injuries than one attributed to the petitioner that he wanted to satisfy his lust ; that the plea from the petitioner's side regarding attack by the relations of the victim so as to prevent her from dishonouring them could not be excluded, and, that Ahmad Khan (P. W.) was not only related to the injured but also was inimical to the petitioner and further that he had falsely been implicated. Learned counsel also argued that there was no allegation in the statement of the prosecutrix that the petitioner even tried to molest her.
It is not correct that the injuries were only skin deep. There were stab deep wounds on vital part of the body of the victim. Similarly it is not correct to say that the prosecutrix did not make any allegation of molestation. After hearing the learned counsel at some length in this behalf; as also in support of other submissions and after perusal of the relevant material placed before us, we do not consider it a fit case for reappraisal of the evidence. No point of law is involved. This petition accordingly is dismissed.
Petition dismissed.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer