Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: GHULAM QADIR VS Respondent: NASRULLAH
1988 S C M R 317
1988 S C M R 317
Present: Nasim Hasan Shah, S.A.Nusrat and Ali Hussain Qazilbash, JJ
GHULAM QADIR--Petitioner
versus
NASRULLAH and another--Respondents
Criminal Petition for Leave to Appeal No.21 of 1983, decided on 24th November, 1987.
(On appeal from the judgment dated 19-12-1982 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, passed in Criminal Appeal No.178 of 1980 and Criminal Revision No.626 of 1980).
Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--
---S.302--Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)--Leave to appeal--Grant of-- Reappraisal of evidence--Appeal against acquittal- Arguments urged relating to reappraisal of evidence on question of fact and case not fit for undertaking that exercise--Leave to appeal refused.
Aitzaz Ahsan, Advocate Supreme Court, instructed by Mahmood A. Qureshi, Advocate- on-Record for Petitioner.
Nemat Khan, Advocate Supreme Court, instructed by Ejaz Ahmad Khan, Advocate- on-Record for the State.
Date of hearing: 24th November, 1987.
ORDER
ALI HUSSAIN QAZILBASH, J.--This is a petition for leave to appeal against the Judgment of Lahore High Court, dated 19-12-1982.
2. Nasrullah appellant was convicted under Section 302 P.P.C. for having committed the murder of Mst. Abida, and sentenced to imprisonment for life by the Additional Sessions Judge, Gujranwala, vide his order dated 23-12-1979 and a fine of Rs.7,000 in default to further five years' R.I. Half of the fine on recovery, was ordered to be paid to the heirs of the deceased. On appeal, however, the High Court accepted the appeal of Nasrullah, respondent, and acquitted him of the charge. The revision petition filed by the complainant was also dismissed through the same Judgment dated 19-12-1982.
3. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the Judgment of the High Court. All that the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks is for the re-appraisal of the evidence on the question of fact. Having considered his submissions in the light of the evidence, we do not consider this is a fit case for undertaking that exercise.
4. The petition is thus dismissed.
M.I./G-57/S Petition dismissed.