Lawyers Directory Listing
Unlock direct contact details for up to 10 lawyers so you can call or WhatsApp the right legal professional and move your matter forward with confidence.
Jail Petition No. 49‑R of 1984, decided on 26th October, 1985.
(On appeal from judgment and order of the Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench, dated 12‑6‑1984, passed in Criminal Appeal No. 175 of 1981).
‑‑‑Art. 185(3)‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 302/307/148/149 Petition for leave to appeal‑‑Eye‑witnesses close relations of deceased‑‑Evidence of recovery witnesses disbelieved and ruled out of consideration‑‑Out of nine persons charged, seven acquitted‑‑Reappraisal of evidence appearing to be justified‑‑Leave granted.
‑‑‑S. 5‑‑Petition sent from jail barred by time‑‑Delay condoned.
This Jail Petition has been filed by two real brothers Muhammad Suleman and Muhammad Haq against the judgment of the Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench dismissing their appeal against the conviction and sentence of life imprisonment awarded to them by the Additional Sessions Judge, Jehlum by order, dated 5‑9‑1981.
2. I have gone through the impugned judgment of the trial Court as well as the learned High Court.
3. In the F.I.R. lodged by complainant Nazir Ahmed, as many as 9 persons were charged with the commission of the offence. The trial Court convicted the two petitioners and one Muhammad Qasim under section 302/34 of the Pakistan Penal Code and other six were acquitted. Muhammad Qasim was acquitted by the High Court.
4. The eye‑witness account was furnished by Nazir Ahmad' complainant, brother of the deceased and another close relation Abdul Hakim son of real sister of the deceased. The evidence regarding recovery of weapons allegedly used by the accused was ruled out of consideration. The motive as well as the evidence of the two eye‑witnesses was believed. The defence pointed out that some improvements were made at the trial by the witnesses and their testimony was in conflict with the medical report. This contention was, however, overruled. In view of the fact that initially 9 persons were charged with the commission of the offence out of whom 7 have been acquitted, recoveries were disbelieved and the two eye‑witnesses are close relations of the deceased, re‑appraisal of evidence seems justified. I, would, therefore, grant leave. As the petition is from jail the limitation of 34 days is liable to be condoned.
‑‑I agree that this is a fit case for leave.
Leave is granted.
M. Y. H. Leave granted.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer