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

MUHAMMAD ASLAM versus STATE


Section 307 Criminal Code of Conduct (v. 1898), Section 439 The apology of the accused accused of a conviction and the apology of the accused during the trial were not declared as evil because the offense Was authorized Detained by the complainant, keeping the accused behind bars will not be in the interest of justice should the sentence be reduced to one already passed

1985 M L D 802

[Lahore]

Before Ghulam Mujaddid Mirza, J

MUHAMMAD ASLAM alias ACHHA--Petitioner

Versus

THE STATE--Respondent

Criminal Revision No. 4 of 1985, decided on 3rd March, 1985.

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

---S. 307--Complainant injured witness patched up matter with accused and having pardoned him--Offence being non-compoundable, prayer of acquittal of accused refused in circumstances.

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

---S. 307--Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 439--Sentence- Accused having undergone sentence of one year--Complainant injured witness patching up matter with accused and pardoning accused at trial stage--Accused not acquitted as offence was non-compoundable In view of pardon granted to accused by complainant, held, keeping of accused behind bars would not be in interest of justice--Sentence reduced to one already undergone.

Ch. Muhammad Siddique for Petitioner.

Kh. Shaukat Ali for the State.

Date of hearing: 4th February, 1985.

JUDGEMENT

This revision was admitted just to consider the quantum of sentence.

Learned counsel submitted that the complainant Abdul Waheed, the injured person, told . the trial Court that he had patched up the matter with the petitioner. It was submitted that on this ground alone, the matter should have been dropped and the petitioner acquitted.

The offence being non-compoundable, the trial Court did not give effect to the statement of the complainant against his conviction. The petitioner filed appeal. That too was dismissed.

Before me, learned counsel for the petitioner urged that as the' first informant excused the petitioner, he may be acquitted.

This I am not inclined to do because the offence is non-compound able. Nevertheless, I think that in view of the stance of the first informant especially when he has pardoned the accused petitioner, it will not be in the interest of justice to keep him behind the bars. He B has already spent about a year in jail. His sentence is reduced to the period already undergone. He shall be set at liberty, forthwith, if not required in any other case. .

The sentence of fine is maintained. That shall be paid to Abdul Waheed, the injured witness, as compensation.

H . A . K .

Revision partly accepted.

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
how to become a advocate from Jaja Abasian 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.