Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: GHULAM HUSSAIN VS Respondent: The STATE
Court Name: Supreme Court of Pakistan Judge(s): Aslam Riaz Hussain, M. S. H. Qureshi Title: GHULAM HUSSAIN vs The STATE Case No.:Criminal Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 88 of 1982 Criminal Appeal
No. 634 of 1981 Date of Judgment:1982-06-12 Reported As: 1982 SCMR 1113 (2) Result: Petition dismissed Judgment ORDER ASLAM RIAZ HUSSAIN, J -Ghulam Hussain petitioner was tried along--with Muhammad Hussain and Muhammad Akram, for an offence under section 307; P. P. C. By a section 30 Magistrate. The allegation against the petitioner and his co-accused was that they attacked at Muhammad Boota (P. W. 1) and Muhammad Siddiq (P. W. 2) with dangs causing two injuries to Muhammad Boota and six injuries to Siddiq aforesaid. 2. The learned trial Court convicted all of them under section 3(17/34, P. P. C. Arid sentenced to 5 years' R. I. Plus fine of Rs. 1,000 each or further one year's R. I.- in default of payment of fine. Muhammad Hussain and Muhammad Akram challenged their conviction in appeal before the High Court while Ghulam Hussain petitioner also filed a separate appeal before it. The learned High Court vide the impugned judgment dated 9-2-1982, accepted the appeal of Muhammad Hussain and Muhammad Akram, while it maintained the conviction and sentence of Ghulam Hussain. Hence the present petition. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner did not dispute either the occurrence or challenge the evidence led in support of the prosecution version, but only urged that on the facts proved on the record the offence in question is not covered by section 307/34, P. P. C. 4. Having considered the motive for the incident and the nature of the attack as well as number and location of the injuries caused by lathis, which have been held in numerous cases to be lathal weapons, we feel that in the circumstances of this case, the offence is covered by section 307, P. P. C. 5. The petition is, therefore, dismissed as being without any merit.