Case Law, Hurt cases 337

Citation Name: PLJ 2006 Cr.C 75
Appelant Side: SHER AMEER
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: STATE
Judge Name: M. A. Shahid Siddiqui
----s. 497(i)--pakistan penal code, (xlv of 1860), ss. 336, 337-a(iv) and 337-f(i) bail, grant of--prayer for--half tooth was broken and adjacent tooth became shaky u/s. 334 and 336 ppc if offender was found to have caused italf-e-udw or itlaf-e-shalahiyat-e-udw--it was mandatory for the court to punish accused with qisas or arsh--punishment with imprisonment was purely discretionary, therefore prohibition contained of s 497(i) cr.p.c. would not be attracted--occurrence appeared to be result of sudden flare up--bail accepted.

To view full case click on Full Case Description
Citation Name: PLJ 2006 Cr.C 98
Appelant Side: ABDUL MAJEED
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: STATE
Judge Name: Nazir Ahmad Siddiqui
----s. 498--pakistan penal code (xlv of 1860), ss. 452, 337-f(i), 148, 149, 354, 337-a(i)--bail before arrest--held:--unexplained delay of one day in lodging fir--accused of sixty years oldman--he was granted bail on deletion of s. 452 which was added--no sharp edge injury on the person of complainant but mere bruses--offence did not fall within prohibitory clause--no previous history of such like cases with the accused--if he was arrested, he would be put to the disgrace & humiliation--bail granted

To view full case click on Full Case Description
Citation Name: PLJ 2006 Cr.C 100
Appelant Side: HABIB AHMAD
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: STATE
Judge Name: Fazal-e-Miran Chauhan
----s. 497--pakistan penal code (xlv of 1860), ss. 337-a(iii), 337-a(i), 34--bail, grant of--held: accused had been declared by d.s.p. to be empty handed at the time of occurrence, whereas he was stated in the fir to have caused injury on the nose of complainant, with a churner, which was never recovered from his possession--bail granted.

To view full case click on Full Case Description
Citation Name: PLJ 2006 Cr.C 118
Appelant Side: MUHAMMAD AKHTAR
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: STATE
Judge Name: Muhammad Akram Baitu
----s. 497(2)--pakistan penal code (xlv of 1860), ss. 337-a(i), 337-a(iii), 34--bail, grant of--further inquiry--held: m.o. while giving an opinion regarding the fracture, had advised for x-ray but did not refer the injured to the radiologist--injured was not admitted in the hospital--accused was behind the bar for the last two months without being required by police--trial was yet the commence--case was of further inquiry--bail allowed.

To view full case click on Full Case Description
Citation Name: PLJ 2006 FSC 296
Appelant Side: NAYYAR ABBAS and another
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: STATE
Judge Name: Dr. Fida Muhammad Khan, Saeed-ur-Rehman Farrukh and Zafar Pasha Chaudhary
----ss. 10(4) & 11--pakistan penal code (xlv of 1860), ss.337-a(i), 459 & 506--appreciation of evidence--occurrance had taken place at about 10-12 acres from house of mother of alleged victim--victim was taken to the place of occurrence and was subjected to sexual intercourse--accused and victim were almost of the same age--lady doctor observed that no mark of violation were seen on body of victim--if intention of accused was to commit rape with victim girl and for the purpose, according to prosecution, they committed trespass into the house, then they could very conveniently accomplish their desire by removing victim girl in a room of house or other part of premises by locking mother of victim in some other room--to carry or to drag victim upto distance of 10-12 acres and that too after passing through a number of houses in the village, did not appeal to reason--victim throughout the process of her abduction did not offer any resistance because neither her clothes were torn nor there appeared any signs of scuffle on her person--victim did not raise alram--the conduct of victim had rendered her version doubtful--victim was wearing shoes when she went into the place of occurrence--question of abduction forcibly and against her will, could not be ignored that most probably victim girl accompanied accused with her consent--accused had been convicted under s.10 (4) of offence of zina (enforcement of hudood) ordinance, (vii of 1979) and had been awarded penalty of death--to prove an offence entailing extreme penalty of death every possible care and caution had to be adopted, which had not been done in the case; it would therefore, be unsafe to maintain conviction of accused under s.10 (4) of offence of zina (enforcement of hudood) ordinance, 1979--if the offence had been committed with consent of victim, then s.10 (2) of the ordinance would be applicable--conviction of accused was altered from s.10 (4) to s.10 (2) of offence of zina (enforcement of hudood) ordinance, 1979 and were sentenced to 10 years' r.i. accordingly--it could not be believed beyond doubt that accused had committed trespass or extended threat or intimidated the victim--manner in which injuries were alleged to have been sustained was found to be contradictory with medical evidence--conviction of accused under ss. 337-a (i), 459 & 506, p.p.c. and under s.11 of offence of zina (enforcement of hudood) ordinance, 1979 were set aside.

To view full case click on Full Case Description
Citation Name: PLJ 2006 Cr.C 593
Appelant Side: STATE
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: ABID HUSSAIN and others
Judge Name: Kh. Muhammad Sharif and Muhammad Farrukh Mahmud
----ss. 302, 337-a(i), 337-a(v), 337-f(v), 148 & 149--conviction and sentence recorded against accused--murder reference was filed regarding confirmation of death sentence--four persons out of seven accused were also in pured besides three persons injured and one killed from the prosecution side and they were medically examined by the same doctor--ten injuries on the side of accused party and nine injuries on the side of complainant party--deceased received only one fire-arm injury at the hands of main accused, who was also injured in occurrence--one fire caused by one accused hit on the left forearm of a person from complainant side--held: main accused had not repeated the injury so it is not a case of death sentence, therefore, the sentence of main accused was altered into life imprisonment with benefit of s. 382-b cr.p.c.--death sentence is not confirmed and the murder reference is answered in negative.

To view full case click on Full Case Description
Citation Name: PLJ 2006 Cr.C 593
Appelant Side: STATE
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: ABID HUSSAIN and others
Judge Name: Kh. Muhammad Sharif and Muhammad Farrukh Mahmud
----ss. 302, 337-a(i), 337-a(v), 337-f(v), 148 & 149--conviction and sentence recorded against accused--murder reference was filed regarding confirmation of death sentence--four persons out of seven accused were also in pured besides three persons injured and one killed from the prosecution side and they were medically examined by the same doctor--ten injuries on the side of accused party and nine injuries on the side of complainant party--deceased received only one fire-arm injury at the hands of main accused, who was also injured in occurrence--one fire caused by one accused hit on the left forearm of a person from complainant side--held: main accused had not repeated the injury so it is not a case of death sentence, therefore, the sentence of main accused was altered into life imprisonment with benefit of s. 382-b cr.p.c.--death sentence is not confirmed and the murder reference is answered in negative.

To view full case click on Full Case Description
Citation Name: PLJ 2006 Cr.C 608
Appelant Side: MUHAMMAD AZEEM
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: STATE
Judge Name: Ijaz Ahmad Chaudhry
----s. 426--pakistan penal code (xlv of 1860), ss. 302(b)/337-a(ii)/337-f(i)/337-f, 382(b)--suspension of sentence--pending appeal--plea of bail--accused had not been attributed any injury to and only one injury was attributed to him, deceased on person of p.w, which according to medical evidence falls within ambit of s. 337(a)(ii) p.p.c.--accused was behind bars and he has already undergone sentence awarded to him for his individual act--impugned judgment shows that accused party had also sustained injuries during occurrence, which were suppressed by prosecution and it appears that occurrence had not taken place in manner narrated by prosecution--held: accused cannot be kept behind bars as punishment only for reason that his two real brothers have been declared proclaimed offenders as every one has to be accounted for his own act--bail petition accepted and operation of sentences suspended.

To view full case click on Full Case Description
Citation Name: PLJ 2006 Cr.C 1012
Appelant Side: MUHAMMAD AMEER and another
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: STATE
Judge Name: Asif Saeed Khan Khosa and Ijaz Ahmad Chaudhry
----ss. 302(b), 324, 337-a(ii) & 337-f(i)--conviction and sentence--compromise between parties--appeal against--pws were eye-witnesses who had received injuries during the incident, were medically examined--locale of injuries on persons of deceased and both injured pws support ocular account--presence of both eye-witnesses at the spot stood established beyond any shadow of doubt, who remained consistent regarding time, place and the manner in which occurrence took place--occurrence was alleged to have taken place when there was day light which discards question of mis-identity of accused--ocular account furnished by pws. was trust worthy and confidence inspiring--both injured pws have forgiven and pardoned the accused for causing injuries to them by accepting compromise, both accused were acquitted of charges u/ss. 324, 337-a(ii) & 337-f(i) p.p.c. and sentences awarded to them thereunder set aside--widow of deceased alongwith four minor children of deceased has so for not affected compromise and pardoned, accused offence of qatl-i-amd of her husband--compromise regarding offence u/s. 302(b) p.p.c. was not complete--partial compromise could not be give effect to for acquittal of accused from charge u/s. 302(b) p.p.c.--accused had caused single blow with bala on head of deceased which proved fatal--injury was on the head which is most vital part of body--no reason to bring conviction of accused u/s. 302(b) p.p.c. by converting it from s. 302(b) p.p.c. recorded by trial court, which was maintained--held: in peculiar facts and circumstances of case death sentence awarded to accused was not warranted which was converted to imprisonment for life--order accordingly.

To view full case click on Full Case Description
Citation Name: PLJ 2006 Cr.C 1146
Appelant Side: PARIAL
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: STATE
Judge Name: Munib Ahmed Khan
----s. 497(2)--pakistan penal code, 1860 (xlv of 1860), ss. 302, 337-a(i), 337-f(i), 34, 147 & 148--bail, grant of--further inquiry--state counsel could not explain as to how co-accused had been let off as an innocent person--factual position in respect to the presence or absence of co-accused had made the contents of the f.i.r. doubtful--time of incident was also not confidence reposing as the f.i.r. number had been mentioned in every document even prior to its registration--delay in lodging f.i.r. was also unexplained--enmity was also apparent from the contents of the f.i.r.--case being of further inquiry, bail was granted to accused
Citation Name: PLJ 2007 Sh.C-AJ&K 41
Appelant Side: SAJID RASHID and others
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: STATE and others
Judge Name: Syed Hussain Mazhar Kaleem
----ss. 337a(3), a(4) & 337f(6)--document were not tendered in evidence--neither reports were tendered in evidence nor any question regarding injuries was asked from scriber--validity--held: a document not tendered in evidence by the prosecution cannot be read and relied upon against an accused for the purpose of conviction.

To view full case click on Full Case Description
Citation Name: PLJ 2007 Sh.C-AJ&K 41
Appelant Side: SAJID RASHID and others
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: STATE and others
Judge Name: Syed Hussain Mazhar Kaleem
----ss. 324, 337a(3), 337-a(4), 337-f(3)/337-f(5) & 337-f(6)--azad jammu & kashmir arms act 1965, s. 13--fire-arm injuries--conviction & sentence recorded by trial court--challenge to--accused sustained injuries during the occurrence which were suppressed by the eye-witnesses--however, modico-legal reports were placed on record by the prosecution--courts below ignored the reports on the ground that the same were not tendered in the evidence--injuries sustained by accused during the occurrence were deliberately concealed by the eye-witnesses--both the parties inflicted injuries to each other and the accumulative effect needs serious consideration--case was remanded

To view full case click on Full Case Description
Citation Name: PLJ 2007 Cr.C 404
Appelant Side: AZHAR and 2 others
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: STATE
Judge Name: Muhammad Farrukh Mahmud
----ss. 302, 337-a(ii), 337-l(ii) & 34--appreciation of evidence--complainant was father of deceased--during occurrence other pw claimed to have received injuries but being injured would not transform him into a truthful witness--abnormal delay of 19-1/2 hours without any explanation in reporting matter with the police was fatal to prosecution case--both the witnesses had materially contradicted each on the point of seat of injuries by one of co-accused; and their statements were also not supported by medical evidence--f.i.rs. recorded at police stations were not free from suspicion--allegedly recovered sotas and hunter used by accused in occurrence, being not blood stained it could not be said that those were weapons which were used at the time of occurrence--prosecution had not produced any independent evidence to prove motive which otherwise was vague--presence of pws at the time of occurrence was not free from doubt--impugned judgment was set aside and accused were acquitted of all charges against them and were directed to be released, accordingly.

To view full case click on Full Case Description
Citation Name: PLJ 2007 Cr.C 996
Appelant Side: ALTAF HUSSAIN and another
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: STATE
Judge Name: Syed Sakhi Hussain Bukhari
----ss. 302, 324, 337-a(ii), 337-f(i), 337-h(ii) & 34--qatl-i-amd--conviction and sentence recorded against accused by trial court--challenge to--no justification to interference--injured person never regained consciousness after sustaining injuries at the hands of accused--death of injured occured after submission of challan in trial court--section 302 ppc was never added and the accused were never charged with the same--held: accused were responsible for qatal-i-amd--appeal was dismissed.

To view full case click on Full Case Description
Citation Name: PLJ 2007 Cr.C 833
Appelant Side: MUHAMMAD ASIF and others
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: STATE
Judge Name: Muhammad Nawaz Bhatti
----s. 497--pakistan penal code, 1860 (xlv of 1860), ss. 337-a(ii), 337-a(i), 337-f(i), (ii), (iii) & (v), 337-l(ii), 148 & 149--bail, grant of--rule of consistency--accused persons were behind the bars since long--co-accused had already been granted bail and under the rule of consistency, accused also deserved concession of bail--three other co-accused had been declared innocent during the course of investigation and it was yet to be determined during the trial as to which party was aggressor as accused party had also filed complaint against complainant party; wherein trial court had summoned complainant party--investigation in the case was complete, challan had been submitted in the court of competent jurisdiction and no useful purpose would be served to put accused behind the bars for an indefinite period--accused were admitted to bail, in circumstances.

To view full case click on Full Case Description
Citation Name: PLJ 2005 FSC 12
Appelant Side: GHAFOOR
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: STATE
Judge Name: Saeed-ur-Rehman Farrukh
----s. 10(2) pakistan penal code, (xlv of 1860) ss. 337-a (ii), 337-f(i), 452--conviction and sentence--challenge to--acccused had trespassed into house of complainant and committed zina-bil-jabr under threat of life--accused had been secured and he attacked pw with knife causing injury on head--no previous enmity between parties which could have provided motive for false involvement of accused--held : accused was rightly convicted by trial court--co-accused had been acquitted by trial court on basis of benefit of doubt--their acquittal were not challenged by state--accused had already suffered a great deal in prolonged trial and incorporation in jail after conviction for about 2 year--sentence u/s. 10(2) is reduced to that already under gone--recovered amount shall be paid to victim as compensation--further held: accused is also liable to pay as arsh in terms of 337-a ii of p.p.c.--appeal dismissed.

To view full case click on Full Case Description
Citation Name: PLJ 2007 Supreme Court 275
Appelant Side: AFZAL and another
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: STATE
Judge Name: Sardar Muhammad Raza Khan & Muhammad Nawaz Abbasi
----ss. 302(b), 324, 337-a (ii), 337-f(i), 337-l, 148 & 149--constitution of pakistan, 1973--art. 185(3)--conviction and sentence recorded against accused by trial court--first appellate court converted the sentence of death into life imprisonment--assailed--leave to appeal--statement of injured witnesses--corroboration of evidence--three eye-witnesses without any omission or addition had consistently supported the prosecution and their deposition sought ample corroboration from medical evidence and recovery of crime empties as well as attending circumstances--held: accused could not be saddled with responsibility of committing murder of deceased, has no substance.

To view full case click on Full Case Description
Citation Name: PLJ 2007 Supreme Court 275
Appelant Side: AFZAL and another
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: STATE
Judge Name: Sardar Muhammad Raza Khan & Muhammad Nawaz Abbasi
----ss. 302(b), 324, 337-a (ii), 337-f(i), 337-l, 148 & 149--conviction and sentence recorded against accused by trial court--sentence was converted into life imprisonment--assailed--leave to appeal--vicarious liability--virtue of--petitioners and their co-accused having formed unlawful assembly caused fire-arm injuries to the deceased and witnesses--it was a case of vicarious liability and the individual role was not ascertainable--by virtue of vicarious liability, accused would be equally responsible for the murder and causing injuries to the witnesses--leave was refused.

To view full case click on Full Case Description
Citation Name: PLJ 2007 Cr.C 141
Appelant Side: SHEHZAD and others
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: STATE
Judge Name: Asif Saeed Khan Khosa and Ijaz Ahmad Chaudhry
----ss. 302(b), 324, 337-d, 337-a(ii) & 337-f(v)--appreciation of evidence--no ill-will or bitterness existed between parties and they were living in the same street as neighbours quite peacefully and amicably--dispute had arisen on the day of occurrence--no pre-existing or on-going motive was available to cause harm to complainant party--investigating officer had admitted that availability of the crime-empties at the place of occurrence had neither been mentioned in the rough site-plan of occurrence nor in the formal site-plan of occurrence prepared by draftsman--crime-empties had been retained by the local police in its custody for more than full month and same had been dispatched to the forensic science laboratory after recovery of a gun from the possession of accused--alleged offensive weapons like sota, danda and iron rod recovered from accused jointly from same house being not stained with blood--such recovery had no evidentiary value--medical evidence had established--accused party had sustained injuries during same incident--plea of accused of exercise of right of private defence, could well be true--medical evidence had not only contradicted the eye-witnesses--f.i.r. itself showed and according to statements made by all the four pws, initial cause of annoyance to accused party on the day of occurrence was provided by complainant party; that complainant party was unarmed at the time of occurrence and it had not caused any injury to accused party--version of accused party in circumstances, could reasonably be true and in all likelihood, it was complainant party which had launched aggression against accused party--accused party had not exceeded its right of private defence--accused in circumstances were entitled to be acquitted--conviction and sentences awarded to accused by the trial court were set aside and accused were acquitted of the charge and were released.

To view full case click on Full Case Description
Citation Name: PLJ 2007 Cr.C 160
Appelant Side: JAY RAM
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: STATE
Judge Name: Mrs. Qaiser Iqbal
----ss. 324, 337-a(i), (ii) & (iii), 337-c, 337-e(i) & (vi)--appreciation of evidence--board-daylight occurrence--benefit of doubt--victim having sustained 38 injuries on his body, it was impossible that his father would have not intervened if he had been present at the spot to save his son from the hands of assailants--conduct of complainant appeared to be unreasonable and unbelievable to a prudent mind--alleged motive itself was not supported by evidence of complainant (father of the victim) and victim--incident having taken place in broad-daylight in a bazar, independent witnesses could be picked up by prosecution, but that had not been done in the case--prosecution having failed to prove case against accused beyond any shadow of doubt, benefit of doubt was extended to accused--sentence awarded to accused by the trial court, was set aside, in circumstances.
Citation Name: PLJ 2007 Cr.C 175
Appelant Side: BASHIR AHMAD and another
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: STATE
Judge Name: Muhammad Farrukh Mahmud and M. A. Shahid Siddiqui
----ss. 302, 337-a(i)(ii), 337-f(i)(iii)/34--appreciation of evidence--sentence, reduction in--complainant party and accused were neighbours--no ill-will or enmity existed between the parties prior to occurrence--injuries on the person of accused were proved through medical evidence--deliberate delay in recording f.i.r. which was not explained, would adversely affect prosecution case--occurrence did not take place in the manner as was stated by pws and they had exaggerated the role of accused--facts of the case had attracted provisions of exception 4 of s. 300, p.p.c. (old)--conviction of accused was altered from offence u/s. 302(b), p.p.c. to offence u/s. 302(c), p.p.c., in circumstances--one of accused persons who was in jail since his arrest had spent more than eight years in confinement--bail order of co-accused passed during pendency of appeal had revealed that he was 85 years of age with very weak health and weak eye-sight and his sentence was suspended after he had served out 2 years, 5 months and 25 days in jail--sentence of both accused was reduced to the period already served by them in jail as same would meet the ends of justice--conviction of both accused recorded for offences u/s. 337-a(i)(ii) and 337-f(i)(iii), p.p.c. was set aside.

To view full case click on Full Case Description
Citation Name: PLJ 2007 Cr.C 218
Appelant Side: GHULAM MUSTAFA and another
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: STATE
Judge Name: Muhammad Moosa K. Leghari
----ss. 497 & 498--pakistan penal code (xlv of 1860), ss. 337-a(ii), 337-l, 337-f(i), 337-h(2), 504 & 34--pre-arrest and after arrest bail, grant of--counter cases--parties had registered counter cases against each other--cases had been challenged and maximum punishment provided for injuries sustained by injured was five years which did not fall within the prohibition contained under s. 497, cr.p.c.--accused was granted after arrest bail, whereas interim pre-arrest bail was granted to co--accused was confirmed.

To view full case click on Full Case Description
Citation Name: PLJ 2007 Cr.C 226
Appelant Side: ZAFAR IQBAL and 3 others
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: STATE
Judge Name: Rahmat Hussain Jafferi
----s. 5--pakistan penal code (xlv of 1860), s. 337--a(i) & (iii)--sending accused on probation--counsel for accused had stated that accused could be sent on probation--assistant advocate-general had no objection if accused were sent on probation--accused, in the instant case, had not planned to commit the offence, but altercation took place between the parties at the spur of moment and incident took place in the heat of moment--accused were first offenders--out of them one was an old and infirm person--if accused were sent to jail, they would mix up with hardened criminals and there was likelihood of developing bad habits by accused--if accused would remain on probation, they would have to execute the bond by which they would not commit offence and create disturbances, but would keep peace--not only complainant would be safe in the hands of accused, but society would also be benefited--present case was a fit case where accused could be sent on probation as provided u/s. 5 of probation of offenders ordinance, 1960--accused were sent on probation accordingly.

To view full case click on Full Case Description
Citation Name: PLJ 2007 Cr.C 741
Appelant Side: MUHAMMAD SAFDAR and another
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: STATE
Judge Name: Syed Sajjad Hussain Shah
----s. 497(2)--pakistan penal code, 1860 (xlv of 1860), ss. 324, 337-a(ii), (iv) & (v)--bail, grant of--further inquiry--allegation against accused was that he inflicted injury by throwing brick, which landed upon the head of injured pw--intention of the accused would be determined at the time of trial after recording evidence--only by throwing a brick, it could not be said with certainty that intention of accused was to commit the qatl-e-amd of injured pw--case of accused called for further inquiry into his guilt within the purview of s. 497(2), cr.p.c.--accused was behind the bars and was no more required for further investigation--to keep accused behind the bars for an indefinite period would not serve any useful purpose--accused was admitted to bail.

To view full case click on Full Case Description
Citation Name: PLJ 2007 Cr.C 1253
Appelant Side: NAZIR AHMAD alias BILLA
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: STATE
Judge Name: Hasnat Ahmad Khan
----s. 302--criminal procedure code (v of 1898), s. 497(2)--bail, grant of--prayer for--further inquiry--question of applicability--post-mortem report--contents of--accused were allegedly armed with fire-arm weapons, yet they avoided to use same effectively--held: question of applicability of s. 302 ppc would be requiring further inquiry within the ambit of s. 497(2), cr.p.c.

To view full case click on Full Case Description
Citation Name: PLJ 2007 Cr.C 286
Appelant Side: WAZIR and 4 others
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: STATE
Judge Name: Rahmat Hussain Jafferi
----ss. 324, 337-a(i) & (ii)--probation of offenders ordinance (xlv of 1960), s. 5--appreciation of evidence--concept of punishment--sending accused on probation--medical officer had fully supported prosecution case and corroborated evidence of witnesses under which accused had been assigned various specific roles of causing injuries to the witnesses--counsel for accused could not point out any discrepancy in the oral evidence--parties who were related to each other were residing within same compound and incident had taken place on a very minor affair and in a heat of passion and temper--no reason existed that prosecution witnesses had falsely involved accused in the case--ocular testimony was confidence inspiring--steps in circumstances, were to be taken towards the reformation of accused--one of the concepts of punishment was also reformation and in view of said basic principle of punishment, probation of offenders ordinance, 1960 had been promulgated by which benefit of probation could be extended to the offenders--key note of probation of offenders ordinance, 1960 was reformation and rehabilitation--offences in the present case, for which accused had been convicted did not come within the debaring provisions of s. 5 of probation of offenders ordinance, 1960--in view of present conditions of jail where offenders instead of reforming themselves, come out as hardened criminals--accused, could be sent on probation so that they could reform themselves while remaining within the society; it was thus expedient in the interest of justice that while maintaining conviction and sentence, instead of sending accused at once to jail a probation order be passed--accused were sent on probation for a period of 3 years, accordingly.

To view full case click on Full Case Description
Citation Name: PLJ 2007 Cr.C 289
Appelant Side: NIDOO alias NIZAMUDDIN and 4 others
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: STATE
Judge Name: Rahmat Hussain Jafferi
----s. 5--pakistan penal code (xlv of 1860), ss. 324, 337-a(ii) & 149--appreciation of evidence--sending accused on probation--injured prosecution witness added name of accused a of causing hatchet injuries to him, but said fact had not been supported and corroborated by complainant-case of accused a, in circumstances was distinguished from the case of other accused persons b & c--both complainant and injured witness were unanimous that accused d instigated remaining accused on which two accused b & c caused hatchet injuries to injured--said fact had been fully supported and corroborated by medical evidence--trial court found lathi injuries allegedly caused by accused two co-accused d & e on the person of injured doubtful and acquitted said accused persons from the charge--injuries caused by accused b & c on instigation of accused d, had been proved from the evidence of prosecution witnesses--trial court in circumstances had rightly convicted and sentenced them--case of accused a being doubtful, he could not be convicted for said offence and he was entitled to be acquitted from charges--as no part of causing injuries to injured from the hands of accused e had been established, he was also liable to be acquitted from the charge--no case having been made out against accused a & e, impugned judgment of the trial court with respect to their involvement, was set aside-accused b, c & d, being first offenders, their sentences were maintained, but they were sent on probation for a period of three years

To view full case click on Full Case Description
Citation Name: PLJ 2007 Cr.C 815
Appelant Side: JAFFAR HUSSAIN and others
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: STATE
Judge Name: Muhammad Nawaz Bhatti
----s. 498--pakistan penal code, 1860 (xlv of 1860), ss. 337-a(i), (ii), 337-f (i), (ii), (iii), (v), 337-l(ii), 148 & 149--bail, refusal of--accused were nominated in the f.i.r. and they had been attributed specific role--investigation was incomplete as accused had not joined the investigation--no mala fide was found on the part of complainant side to falsely involve accused--pre-arrest bail was an extraordinary relief which could only be granted if there was mala fide on the part of complainant or there were sound reasons to believe that accused persons had been falsely involved--accused had also been declared guilty during the course of investigation--concession of bail before arrest would be granted to accused, if it was established that his involvement in the case was based on mala fides by the prosecution, but no such reason existed to grant such relief to accused.

To view full case click on Full Case Description
Citation Name: PLJ 2007 Cr.C 522
Appelant Side: DILMEER and others
V e r s u s
Opponent Side: STATE
Judge Name: Hasnat Ahmed Khan
----s. 497(2)--pakistan penal code, 1860, ss. 337-a(i), a(ii), f(i), l(ii) 302, 148 & 149--bail, grant of--further inquiry--role attributed to accused was not supported by mlc--question as to which party was aggressor was still to be determined through evidence--no recovery was affected--case of accused was at per with that of co-accused already on bail--held: matter was of further inquiry--bail granted.

To view full case click on Full Case Description