Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: KHALAS KHAN VS Respondent: AMIR KHAN
1988 S C M R 363
1988 S C M R 363
Present: Aslam Riaz Hussain, Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Saad Saood Jan, JJ
KHALAS KHAN--Petitioner versus AMIR KHAN and others--Respondents
Criminal Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No.419 of 1987, decided on 12th December, 1987.
(Against the order of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, dated 14-11-1982 passed in Criminal Revision No.550 of 1982).
Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--
---S.302--Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)--Leave to appeal--Grant of--Appreciation of evidence--Petition against acquittal--Reasons recorded by trial Court for acquitting accused being sound, High Court was, held, justified in upholding finding of acquittal leave to appeal refused.
M. Anwar Sipra, Advocate Supreme Court for Petitioner. Kh. Muhammad Afzal, Advocate Supreme Court and Mehdi Khan Mehtab, Advocate-on-Record for Respondents Nos.l to 6.
Faiz Muhammad Bhatti, Advocate Supreme Court and Ejaz Ahmad Khan, Advocate- on-Record for the State.
Date of hearing: 12th December, 1987.
ORDER ASLAM RIAZ HUSSAIN, J.--Khalas Khan petitioner seeks leave to appeal against the judgment of the Lahore High Court dated 14-11-1982 upholding the judgment of the trial Court and dismissing petitioner's criminal revision, in a case under section 302/34, P.P.C.
2. We' have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner at considerable length and have gone through the impugned judgment with his help. He has also taken us through the relevant portions of the evidence.
We have given our anxious consideration to the contention of the petitioner's counsel that the Courts below have not appreciated the evidence properly. But we are not inclined to agree with him and are of the view that the reasons recorded by the trial Court for acquitting the respondents are sound and the High Court was justified in upholding the finding of acquittal. This is, therefore, not a fit case for grant of leave. The petition is consequently dismissed.
M . I / K -37 /S Petition dismissed.