PAK LAW GPT — Pakistan Case Law AI justice scale emblemPAK LAW GPTCase law · Urdu & English

ALI SHER vs State S — 2022 PCrLJN 33 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH

Case information

Citation
2022 PCrLJN 33 KARACHI-HIGH-COURT-SINDH
Court
Sindh High Court
Year
2022
Parties
ALI SHER vs State S
Subject matter
Criminal
Provisions referred to
S. 497; S. 337-A; S. 337-N; S. 337-F; Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

Fields are extracted from the reported citation and judgment text. Where a detail is not stated in the record, it is not shown.

Judgment text as reported

ALI SHER VS State S. 497(2)--- Penal Code (XLV of 1860), Ss. 302,324, 337-A(i), 337-A(iv), 337-F(i), 337-F(v), 337-L(2), 34---Qatl-i-amd, attempt to commit qatl-i-amd, hurt and common intention---Bail, grant of---Further inquiry---Role assigned to accused in the FIR was one of causing hurt to the injured---Final medico-legal certificate revealed that injuries suffered by the injured were classified as shujah-i-munaqqilah and shuijah-i-khafifah---Shujah-i-khafifa was a bailable offence and shujah-i-munaqqilah was punishable under S. 337-A(iv), P.P.C., by arsh and might also be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which might extend to ten years as tazir; in other words, for the offence of shujah-i-munaqqilah the mandatory punishment was arsh while punishment by imprisonment was additional/discretionary---Shuijah-i-munaqqilah though was a non-bailable offence but subject to subsection (2) of S. 337-N, P.P.C., which was a non-obstante clause---By virtue of subsection (2) of S. 337-N, P.P.C., in all cases of hurt under Chapter XVI of P.P.C., the additional punishment of tazir over and above arsh was awarded in those cases where the offender was previous convict or a habitual, hardened, desperate or dangerous criminal or where the offence had been committed by him in the name or pretext of honour---Admittedly, accused persons were not previous convicts or habitual/hardened criminals---Accused persons would at best beliable for arsh, not imprisonment---Case against accused persons did not fall under the prohibitory clause of S. 497, Cr.P.C.---Injuries suffered by other injured was classified as ghayrjaifah hashimah, which was punishable under S. 337-F(v), P.P.C., by daman and might also be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which might extend to five years as tazir---Said injury was not specifically attributed to the accused persons in the FIR; they shared a common intention to commit the murder---Assuming that they were eventually found liable for the same, if they were not previous convicts etc., then again by virtue of subsection (2) of S. 337-N, P.P.C., the punishment for that would not be imprisonment---Incident was said to have happened in a playground where both sides had come to play cricket---Accused persons were said to have held cricket bats and not any deadly weapon---Incident appeared to have taken place in the heat of moment---No prior enmity existed between the parties---Nothing was available to suggest that the accused persons had come to the playground sharing a common intention to commit the murder of the deceased---Accused persons had brought the case within the ambit of S. 497(2), Cr.P.C.---Investigation against the accused persons had been completed and their physical custody was not required for further investigation---Bail to accused persons was granted, in circumstances.

Back to the case-law library · Search Pakistani case law in Urdu or English