FAQIR MOHAMMAD vs AKBAR ETC.S
This petition for leave to appeal was filed against an order of the Lahore High Court which suspended the life imprisonment sentences of the respondents and granted them bail. The High Court had suspended the sentences primarily because the respondents' plea of self-defence required further examination, given a significant number of unexplained injuries sustained by the accused side. The petitioner contended that the plea of self-defence was untenable as blood-stained earth was recovered from the deceased's land, proving the respondents were the aggressors, and that the trial court's conviction under Section 302 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 was well-reasoned. The Supreme Court of Pakistan declined to conduct a detailed examination of the merits at this stage, holding that the High Court had not exercised its discretion improperly under the circumstances. Consequently, the petition for leave to appeal was dismissed.
- Whether the existence of unexplained injuries on the person of the accused can justify the suspension of a sentence of life imprisonment pending appeal?
- Can a plea of self-defence be considered a sufficient ground for the grant of bail and suspension of sentence by the High Court?
- Will the Supreme Court interfere with the discretionary exercise of power by the High Court in suspending a sentence unless it is shown to be exercised improperly?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
1. ANWARUL HAQ, C. J.-This is a petition for leave to appeal against the order of the Lahore High Court dated the 24th August, 1977, whereby the sentences of life imprisonment awarded to the respondents herein, by the Additional Sessions Judge, Sahiwal, were suspended, subject to their furnishing bail in the sum of Rs. 22,000 with one surety each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Assistant Commissioner, Sahiwal.
2. The main reason given by the High Court is that the plea of self --defence needed examination in view of the fairly large number of injuries sustained by the side of the accused, which had not been explained by the prosecution.
3. Mr. S. A. Saeed, the learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that the plea of self-defence stands negatived by the fact that blood--stained earth was recovered from the land of the deceased, thus clearly indicating that the accused were the aggressors. He contends that the trial Court bad given good reasons for recording a conviction under section 302, P. P. C.
4. We do not think it proper to embark upon a detailed examination of the case at this stage. Suffice it to say that the learned Judge in the High Court does not appear to have exercised his discretion improper in the facts and circumstances of the case.
5. The petition, accordingly, fails and is hereby dismissed. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.
Cited by 9 cases
- SAFDAR SHAH Versus State 2022 YLRN 135
- Khamiso alias JOGI and another vs The State 2020 MLD 1614
- RAFIQUE AHMAD alias SHIKA Versus State 2005 PCRLJ 193
- Dr. AFTAB AHMED and anothers vs THE STATE 1996 PLD Karachi 149
- KHALIQDAD KHAN vs Syed ALTAF HUSSAIN SHAH And Another 1986 SCMR 1975
- ALTAF HUSSAIN SHAH vs THE STATE- 1986 P Cr. L J 2202
- RAFIQUE AHMAD alias Shika vs STATE 2005 PLJ FSC 65
- RAFIQUE AHMAD alias SHIKA vs THE STATE 2005 P C R L J 193
- Rafique Ahmad Alias Shikha vs The State K.L.R. 2005 Criminal Cases 58