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

HAKIMUDDIN versus AMTUL MATEEN


The Pakistan Penal Code sections 325/34 and 323 under Section 325, PPC were not presented to the radiologist to prove the nature of the X-ray report or injury; PPC was changed to one under Section 323, PPC. Had to

1984 M L D 1255

[Lahore]

Before Muhammad Munir Khan, J

ALLAH YAR--Petitioner

versus

THE STATE--Respondent

Criminal Revision No. 555 of 1984, heard on 11th November, 1984.

(a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--

---Ss. 325/34 & 323--Radiologist not produced to prove X-ray report or nature of injury Conviction under S. 325, P.P.C. held, had to be altered to one under S. 323, P.P.C.

(b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--

---Ss. 325/ 34 & 323--Sentence--Accused old man of 55 years--Previous non-convict--Sentence of six months' R.I. reduced to three months' R.I.

Nasim Sabir for Petitioner.

M. Naeem for the State.

Date of hearing: 11th November, 1984.

JUDGMENT

Facts giving rise to this revision petition are that Allah Yar petitioner alongwith Altaf Hussain were tried by Magistrate First Class, Rabwah who convicted them under section 325/34, P.P.C. and sentenced them to one year's R.I. On appeal the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jhang partly accepted the appeal. He acquitted Altaf Hussain co-accused of the charge but maintained the conviction and sentence of the petitioner, hence this revision.

2. Learned counsel has not challenged the liability of the petitioner of having caused injury to the victim. He has challenged the nature of the offence committed by the petitioner. Learned counsel submits that since the Radiologist was not examined, therefore, the conviction of the petitioner under section 325, P.P.C. is not maintained. The learned counsel for the State has supported the judgment of the trial Court.

3. I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties with care. I find sufficient force in the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner. I am of the view that since Radiologist was not produced in the Court to prove the X-ray, the conviction of the petitioner under section 325 ,P. P. C . has to be altered to one under section 323, P.P.C.

4. This brings me to the question of sentence. I find that the petitioner is an old man of 55 years and that he is not a previous convict. The sentence of six months R.1. is reduced to three months' R. I.

S.A. Conviction altered.

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
advocate for immigration from Wah Cantt 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.