[Sections 96 To 106, P.P.C.]
Essentials to be proved for right of private defence are. (1) It was the other party who opened the attack; (2) Party taking the plea also suffered injuries; and the essential thing is to ascertain as to who was the aggressor and whether the accused used more violence than was necessary. 1987 SCMR 385 Kala.
Accused not to prove defence version beyond reasonable doubt. If the defence version has reasonable possibility of being true. High Court accepted plea of self defence when there was possibility of cross firing, the appellants may have fired in self-defence. (D.B) PLJ 1996 Cr.C. (Pesh) 1265, Alam Khan.
Right of defence of person and property is available in the case of Qatl-i-Ahmad, rather it is obligatory for a Muslim to avail of the right as duty. Held, accused rightly acquitted. PLJ 1991 Cr.C. (Pesh.) 423. Ziarat Khan v. Khadim Hussain.
Receiving injuries by the accused is not necessary for the exercise of right of private defence. Apprehension of imminent danger is enough to get the benefit of section 100, P.P.C. (DB) 1976 P.Cr.LJ 329 Aludo.
Apprehension alone is enough. Apprehension of danger to body, though no actual harm is caused, gives a right of self-defence. (DB) PLD 1959 Pesh. 1 Bashir.
Apprehension of grievous hurt or death developed by the accused, and illegal dispossession of disputed site gave rise to exercise of right of self-defence and of property. Defence plea accepted and the accused acquitted for offences u/Ss. 304 and 323 PPC. PLJ 1997 Cr.C. (Lah.) 24, Shahid Mumtaz etc.
Every idle threat without considering and reflecting if it was really intended to be executed does not entitle use of arms against others. Accused firing at pursuers wanting to arrest him and take him to police station, convicted under sections 307 and 302, PPC but awarded lesser penalty. (DB) PLD 1970 Lah. 857. Bashir Ahmed.
Police cannot kill indiscriminately persons involved in encounter on the ground of the exercise of right of private defence. The right has to be exercised as provided u/Ss. 95 to 106 PPC. Police is to enforce right provided under Article 9 of the Constitution. "No person shall be deprived of life or liberty save in accordance with law." 1992 SCMR 1983, Ch. Muhammad Yaqub etc.
Right of private defence. Principles and case-law discussed. PLD 1974 Lah. 274. Muhammad Yaqub.
Apprehension of further injury. Accused and deceased quarrelled over use of community tap water. Deceased, 20 years knocked out two teeth of accused with fist blow. Accused apprehending further injury gave one stick blow on head causing death. Conviction of accused not justified and acquitted. 1975 P.Cr.LJ 284 Jammo PLJ 1975 Cr.C. (Kar.) 488. 
Appellant and his father received serious injuries and incident took place at the door of their house. Appellant had genuine apprehension of losing his life, clearly indicates that the appellant had acted under the right of private defence. Appeal allowed. PLJ 1996 Kar. 267, Noor Khan.
Deceased giving grievous injury to the accused: three co-accused giving six lathi blows to the deceased, including two on vital part. Held, case covered by section 100, PPC. Right of private defence not exceeded. (DB) 1975 P.Cr.LJ 923 Bahawal etc.
Benefit or provision of self-defence allowed and accused acquitted where he saw his father in naked state who obviously was likely to get gravely and suddenly provoked to the extent of losing self-control and having been attacked in such a situation by the complainant party as well as resulting in grievous hurt to him, held, accused was fully entitled to benefit of provision of self-defence entitling him to acquittal. 1992 SCMR 1592. Muhammad Younas.
Mob marching on to premises of accused, headed by deceased and injured P.Ws. pelting stone, on the accused; accused retaliated by gun fire. Held, case covered by section 100, PPC. Accused acquitted. (DB) 1976 P.Cr.LJ 615 Ghulam Shabbir.
Accused intervening for rescue when deceased giving dang blows to M. and K. Deceased giving three dang blows to accused. Accused in heat of moment giving one fatal knife blow to deceased. Held, accused acted in the right of private defence and acquitted. 1975 P.Cr.LJ 694 Muhammad Anwar. 1975 P.Cr.LJ 801.
Firing at deceased while attempting to retreat would be fully covered by right of private defence u/Ss. 96, 100 and 102, PPC. (DB) NLR 1991 Cr. 199. Mazhar Mir.
Pursuit of robbers by the accused. Robbers attacking pursuers. A robber killed. Held, right of private defence available. (DB) 1950 Sindh 32. Arbab v. Crown.
Against dacoits. "If persons were as quick as Dhu Ram with their guns, I believe there will be fewer dacoities in villages. One does not wait to fire a shot until a dacoit or robber comes up to shake hands or to enquire about one's health." Threats can give a right of self-defence. (DB) AIR 1926 Cal. 1012 Ali Mea v. King Emperor; AIR 1929 All. 299 Dhu Ram v. Emperor. (DB) PLD 1960 Lah. 62 Abdul Latif.
Pursuit of thief. Thief escaping with stolen goods chased. Thief fired with pistol in air and threatened the pursuit party. A single gunshot fired in returned killed the thief. Right of private defence not exceeded as thief was armed with pistol. 1971 P.Cr.LJ 956 Sher Ali.
Against a burglar at night. The accused not knowing at night whether the burglar was armed or did not exceed right of self-defence under clause (4) of section 103, PPC. by striking him three times and causing his death. Conviction under section 304, PPC set aside. ILR 6 Lah. 463. Ismail v.Crown. AIR 1926 Lah. 28.
Shooting before attempt for theft. Deceased peeping through aperture of wall and then receding a couple of paces in cloudy night. Visits of thieves frequent in the locality. Accused firing fatal shot in the direction of deceased considering him a thief, without taking aim. Held, accused had a right of private defence. Intention to kill or rash and negligent act not established. Commitment quashed. 1972 P.Cr.LJ 430 Inayat.
No right of private defence when the accused surreptiously rendered house to have illicit intercourse with a female and apprehended there. Not a case of lesser sentence either. Death sentence maintained 1987 SCMR 293 Faqir. Muhammad.
Right of private defence against a sodomist who attempted to commit sodomy extended to causing of death. PLJ 1990 Cr.C. (Lah.) 251. Muhammad Zaki.
To escape from sodomy accused gave danda blows to deceased in darkness. Held, right of private defence not exceeded. 1978 P.Cr.LJ 1089. Muhammad Riaz.
When cycle of accused snatched and attempt made to commit sodomy on him, he inflicted chhuri blow and killed the deceased, held, accused had complete right of private defence and acquitted. 1994 SCMR 1087, Rafaqat Ahmed. = PLJ 1994 SC. 325.
Right of private defence against police. When police officer is not acting with jurisdiction or lawfully, section 99, PPC is not applicable and the right of private defence attracted. ILR 6 Lah. 392 Haq Dad v. Crown.
Policeman trying to arrest accused illegally, accused shot dead the policeman chasing him. Held, accused entitled to use force to avoid illegal arrest but shooting the policeman dead amounts to exceeding the right under section 304 (1) and sentenced to 5 years' R.I. (SC) 1970 SCMR 810 Mashal Khan (SC) 1971 SCMR 162. Abdul Latif. 1975 SCMR 80 Mashal Khan.
Against Bailiff executing illegal attachment warrants. A bailiff executing a civil decree wanted to attach milch cattle and was assaulted by judgment-debtor when trying to take the cattle away. Attachment document held to be illegal document. Bailiff acting under an illegal warrant is not protected. Held, accused acted in the right of defence of their property and could not be punished under section 322 or 323, PPC, 1971 P.Cr.LJ 1135 Tufail etc.
Against Sub-Inspector Police. Sub-Inspector of Police raided the premises of the accused without authority and posted an armed constable to restrict the movements of the accused. At Sub-Inspector's instigation the cattle of the accused were rounded up to be taken away. Accused protested and was fired upon. Accused called for help but the Sub-Inspector fired upon other accused who then inflicted injuries on Sub-Inspector in self-defence. Held, no offence committed. 1972 P.Cr.LJ 144 Bashir.
Accused illegally arrested and wrongfully confined gave a fist blow to deceased who grappled with him. Deceased died of fist blow. Held, accused had acted in right of private defence and acquitted. 1988 SCMR 662. Muhammad Ramzan.
Resistance of time expired warrants is no offence. 196 IC 731 Ragubir etc. v. Emperor.
Defective warrants. When defective warrants for attachment of property were executed, the accused took back the cattle and fought the police and executing party. Held, accused had the right of private defence. No offence committed. 43 Cr.LJ. 518 Prage etc v. Emp.
Resistance to illegal warrants is not offence. (DB) 2 Cr.LJ 64 King v. Himat Ali. ILR 13 Bom. 168.
Water dispute. Right of private defence persisted till end. Free fight between two parties closely related to each other over irrigation water. Complainant party appear to be aggressors. In the melee following deceased received fatal injury. Nature of injury indicating no intention to kill. Held right of private defence persisted till the end. 1975 P.Cr.LJ 829 Baggu etc.
Warabandi; attack to remove diversion of water. As the accused were not injured, held they had exceeded right of self-defence by causing death. 7 years' R.I. awarded. NLR 1984 Cr. 628 Muhammad Ali.
Turn of water, exchange of abuses and grappling between the accused and the deceased. Appellant tried to defend his right of use of water. 4 spear injuries caused to the deceased. Accused claimed to have been injured but not examined by a doctor. Held had he been examined by a doctor and the injuries had been found perhaps the case would have been different but owing to the absence of injuries on his person the accused had exceeded his right of private defence. Sentenced to 10 years' R.I. under section 304 (1). 1975 P.Cr.LJ 513 Badar Din.
Complainant party diverting water much earlier than their own turn, according to warabandi, and altercation leading to loss of life on complainant side. Deceased and companions first attacking accused with lathis and accused only acting in retaliation. Mere fact of complainant party suffering greater number of injuries than accused not sufficient to hold accused as aggressors. Right of private defence upheld, accused acquitted. 1974 P.Cr.LJ 22. Ibrahim etc.
Complainant party diverting water much earlier than their own turn according to Warabandi. Altercation between parties leading to fight. One on complainant side losing life and two appellants receiving injuries. Held, appellants were within their right to resist and divest complainant party of possession of water and inflict injuries to the extent of causing death. Appellants acquitted. 1972 P.Cr.LJ 51 Khuda Bakhsh etc.
Deceased armed with Belcha (spade) trying to divert flow of water to his own field before his turn. Quarrel ensuing between deceased and accused giving Belcha blows to accused. Accused receiving injuries but after retreating two paces firing at deceased and killing him. Held, accused entitled to right of private defence. Acquittal by High Court not interfered with. (SC) 1972 SCMR 690 Asal Din v. Mir Bahadar.
Canal water during accused's turn flowing into the field of complainant party. Such party watching flow but not repairing the breach. Accused party alleged to have arrived at the spot, raised lalkara and fired with the gun in revenge killing one on complainant side. Accused pleaded that they had acted in self-defence while attacked. Parties involved in previous litigation and blood-feud existing between them. No unnatural to think that complainant party's gathering at the spot was not with innocent purpose. Wounds suffered by some accused including one incised. Inference justified that the accused apprehended danger to their lives. Right of self-defence in circumstances not exceeded while getting possession of water and rescuing their companions. (DB) 1973 P.Cr.LJ 101 Nazar Muhammad.
Personal defence. Deceased armed with spade intending illegally to divert accused's water by using force. Accused coming to enforce his right and likely to suffer grievous hurt if not death in ensuing inevitable fight. Killing deceased in exercise of right of private defence. Such killing does not amount to any offence. (DB) 1969 P.Cr.LJ 740 Fazal.
Water supply defence of. Plea of private defence can be raised in appeal if spelt out from prosecution evidence though not specifically taken at trial. Accused in possession of water on account of their irrigation turn. Attempt at diverting water supply by other party held entitled accused to maintain supply by causing injuries to the intruders in defence of their property. (DB) PLD 1970 Lah. 832 Ghulam Rasul etc.
Warabandi (Turn of water). Deceased diverting flow of water to his own field when it was accused's turn. Deceased given one lathi blow by each accused. Fatal blow not attributable to any accused. Both accused given benefit of doubt and acquitted. (DB) 1973 P.Cr.LJ 41. State v. Din Muhammad etc.
Cattle trespass. Accused while taking away cattle grazing in their field to cattle pound assaulted by owner of cattle armed with lathis and hatchets with a view to rescue cattle. Accused within their right to cause harm to assailant even to the extent of causing death. (DB) 1970 P.Cr.LJ 574. Nawaza etc.
Snatching rounded up cattle. Accused rounding up cattle of complainant party for taking to the cattle pound. Complainant party assaulting and injuring accused for release of cattle. Held the accused had right of private defence to the extent of causing death. 1975 P.Cr.LJ 1021 Sadiq etc.
Trespassing cattle, can be kept by the owner and their release opposed by the use of minimum force. (SC) PLD 1976 SC 241 Ghulam Muhammad v. Allah Yar. PLJ 1976 SC 205.
Horse damaging crops, and caught for impounding, the complainant party injured while rescuing the horse. Held, case covered by right of private defence. As right exceeded conviction u/S. 304 (II) instead of section 302 held proper. (DB) 1976 P.Cr.LJ 419 Gulzar etc.
Suppressing injuries on accused, and both sides suppressing the truth. Prosecution and defence versions both unreliable. Discrepancies in prosecution evidence of serious nature. Possibility of accused having acted in self-defence not ruled out. Held, accused did not exceed right of self-defence (SC) 1973 SCMR 26 Muhammad Abdullah v. Muhammad Safdar Khan.
No injuries on accused. who killed the person who had floored his old father and sat on him and started beating him make little difference. Right of private defence allowed. 1972 P.Cr.LJ 204 Kaki.
No injuries on accused. Fight between accused and deceased. Injuries on the accused presumed to have been inflicted by the deceased unless proved otherwise. Doubtful which party attacked first, benefit must go to the accused. (DB) PLD 1960 Pesh. 50 Khair-ur-Rehman.
Private defence and number of injuries on vital parts of deceased, held, sufficient to rule out plea of private defence. Repeated blows by accused prove mens rea. (DB) NLR 1985 Cr. 368. Salim Masih.
Extent of injuries on one party as against the other is not in every case a good guide for fixing question of responsibility for occurrence. 1973 P.Cr.LJ 656 Ghulam Muhammad.
Harm caused to offending party out of all proportions to harm threatened or apprehended from such party, right of self-defence in circumstances would stand negatived. (SC) PLD 1971 SC 720. Ahmed and 3 others.
Squeezing of testicles can result in death. Accused stabbed deceased as a result of deceased squeezing and pressing hard his testicles. Held, case of accused fell under section 100, PPC. (DB) AIR 1937 Lah. 108 Sardari Lal v. Emperor. 83 Cr.LJ 867 = 170 Ind. Cas. 25.
Number of injuries on complainant party by itself is no conclusive criterion to judge whether part played by the accused was cruel or not. Complainant party giving cause of annoyance to accused persons and on their taking exception to their obnoxious act, launching attack with formidable weapons. One on complainant side losing life and accused receiving injuries in the fight. Held, accused acted in self-defence, hence acquitted. 1973 P.Cr.LJ 766 Allah etc.
Free fight. Accused while rounding up cattle of opposite-party trespassing into his field offered resistance by opposite-party. Clash between parties resulting in injuries to both sides. Accused giving a spear blow to deceased at his back piercing him through and through. Held, accused not being faced by deceased exceeded his right of self-defence. Conviction under section 302 altered to under section 304 (1), PPC (DB) 1971 P.Cr.LJ 581. Anwar. Contra 1970 SCMR 597 When deceased fired at from behind.
" Hostile parties determined to have trial of strength. Free fight ensuing. No right of private defence in such circumstances. Each participant liable for his individual act. (SC) 1972 SCMR 676 Abdul Rahman v. Gadai Khan etc.
Free fight. No right of private defence can be claimed in a free fight. PLD 1993 S.C. 1. Muhammad Iqbal.
Simultaneously picking up same type of weapons but deceased taking lead and striking appellant on head. Appellant had the right of private defence by attacking deceased. 1973 P.Cr.LJ 23 Rahim Bakhsh.
Apprehension of grievous hurt. Deceased abusing and giving soti blows giving apprehension of grievous injury to the accused. Accused gave single knife blow. Held, accused acted in right of self-defence and acquitted. 1972 P.Cr.LJ 1356 Rehmat Ali.
Deceased armed with knife and inflicting 4 incised wounds on the appellant. Held, the appellant had complete right of private defence in killing the deceased. NLR 1984 Cr. 756. Nisar Ali.
Complainant party armed with spears and lathi. Accused apprehending danger fired at the complainant party killing one. Held, the accused acted in exercise of right of private defence and acquitted. 1978 P.Cr.LJ 1110 Amir.
Possibility that complainant party came armed with sharp-edged weapons not ruled out. Deceased received single fatal blow in melee. Held, accused acted in right of private defence and acquitted. 1976 P.Cr.LJ 1117 Muhammad Anwar.
Heat of moment. Right of private defence is not exceeded in heat of the moment. (DB) PLD 1964 Pesh. 143 Muhammad Ishfaq PLD 1956 Lah. 1045 Muzaffar Khan.
"Golden Scales" Force used cannot be weighed in golden scales. (DB) PLD 1965 Quetta 33 Ghazi Khan.
Golden Scales cannot be used to weigh the right of private defence when a person is in panic and apprehends danger to his life. Appellant who fired at the deceased with a pistol when the deceased was about to attack him with a knife, acquitted. PLD 1988 SC 25. Mashal Khan.
Golden Scales. Person exercising right of private defence under imminent threat to his own person is not expected to weigh in golden scales his own reaction. PLD 1986 SC 199. Malik Waris Khan v. Ishtiaq.
Stress of self-preservation. Person under stress of self-preservation of property or person is not expected to measure in golden scales degree of threat exhibited before availing the right of self-defence. 1973 P.Cr.LJ 656 Ghulam Muhammad.
Self-defence and act likely to cause harm committed to prevent other harm (Sec. 81, PPC). Accused to prevent their houses from immediate danger of being submerged or washed away erecting a banna, complainant party trying to demolish such banna attacked by accused resulting in two deaths and injuries to others. Held accused not liable for murder as they were protected u/S. 81, PPC and as they had not caused more harm than that was necessary. (DB) PLD 1979 Lah. 711 (2). Muhammad Sarwar.
Force used cannot be weighed in Golden Scales. Accused apprehending grievous harm to his brother, surrounded and being attacked by the opposite-party, firing gunshots and causing death of one person on complainant's side. Held, the accused in natural apprehension at spur of moment could not be expected to measure his right of defending his brother in golden scales or to modulate his defence step by step. Accused entitled to complete right of self-defence. (SC) 1971 SCMR 800 Jamal Din.
Modulation of right step by step. Right of self-defence cannot be modulated step by step nor could be weighed in golden scales. Right of accused to defend himself continues as long as reasonable apprehension of harm persists. Injury received by accused on vital part and prosecution failed to explain it. Motive with complainant party to attack. Mere fact that deceased received three injuries while accused got only one did not by itself show that the accused had no right of self-defence. (SC) 1972 SCMR 549. Ahmed Din v. Faiz Ahmed etc.
Firing shot at deceased from behind would not impair plea of right of self-defence in the thick of fighting. (SC) 1970 SCMR 597 Ahmed Nawaz. (Contra 1971 P.Cr.LJ 581).
Exceeding right of private defence. Deceased and his uncle found aggressors. Injuries on appellant simple and on non-vital parts of body. Injuries on deceased with dagger grievous and simple. Held, appellant exceeded right of private defence and sentenced to 7 years' R.I. u/S. 304(1), PPC. PLJ 1984 Cr.C. (Lah.) 480. Nasar Ullah.
Exceeding right of private defence attracts the offence u/S. 304(1), PPC. Sentence reduced to 10 years' R.I. NLR 1989 Cr. 315. Ghulam Siddiq etc.
Right of private defence exceeded when the appellant found to have shot dead the deceased while the injuries on the appellant were only simple abrasions and a contusion on his arm. Conviction altered from 302 to 304 (1), PPC. PLJ 1987 SC 630. Ghulam Hussain.
Exceeding right of private defence. (Sections 302, 99 104, P.P.C.) Law does not permit a person under pretext of private defence of property to kill a man outright. Accused arriving at the spot determined to kill the deceased, without protesting or raising any objection about trespass of property by deceased and shooting him dead on the land in dispute. Held, accused acted far beyond what the law permitted him to do, and cannot be permitted to claim that he acted in exercise of private defence and exceeded it. Conviction under section 302/34, PPC upheld. (SC) PLD 1970 SC 212 Sardari.
Exceeding right of private defence of person by inflicting 28 incised injuries to the deceased to save himself from sexual assault. Conviction altered from 302, to 304 (1), PPC and sentence reduced to already undergone. 1983 SCMR 969. Muhammad Yaqub.
Snatching the weapon of offence. While two persons grappling. The accused received minor injuries but successful in snatching the kirpan and stabbed the deceased. Held, the accused had the right of private defence but exceeded it. Offence under section 304 (1), Sentence 5 years' R.I. (DB) 47 Cr.LJ 358. Harbans Singh AIR 1947 Lah. 37.
Spearing deceased when he was retreating, after accused had been beaten by the deceased. Held the accused exceeded the right. Convicted under section 304 (1), P.P.C. (DB) 1975 P.Cr.LJ 820. Manzur-ul-Haq.
4 or 5 empty-handed persons; encircling the accused; injuries on accused and PWs indicating grappling and tooth biting. Accused firing pistol hitting the deceased. Held, the accused exceeded the right of private defence as there was no apprehension of grievous hurt from empty-handed persons. Conviction altered from 302 to 304 (1), P.P.C. 1975 P.Cr.LJ 657 Mumtaz, Hussain.
Deceased although aggressor was yet unarmed. The accused had no justification to give two fatal knife blows to him, thus the accused had exceeded the right of private defence. Sentence of 9 years' R.I. not interfered with. 1989 SCMR 1973 Muhammad Sharif v. Riasat Ali.
Right not available to an armed person in a scuffle between an unarmed man and him. (DB) PLD 1959 Lah. 1009 Mehdi Khan.
Right of private defence not available when accused coming armed with lethal weapon, predetermined to vindicate his honour. (DB) PLD 1975 Pesh. 52. Najib Raza Rehmani.
Deceased disarmed, his sickle having been snatched by the accused. Deceased given four injuries on the head fracturing the skull. Not a scratch on the accused. Held, the accused had no right of private defence. (SC) 1976 SCMR 179 Nazir Ahmed.
Both parties fully prepared coming to the spot, engaged in pitched battle, freely using weapon, injuring members of both parties. Held, no party could claim right of private defence. (DB) 1970 P.Cr.LJ 1257 Bostan and others.
Symbolic possession. Symbolic delivery of possession in execution of the decree, is as good as actual physical possession. (SC) 1969 SCMR 138 Allah Ditta v. Ghulam Nabi.
Possession and title. Person although having no title to property in settled possession of it for a long time. Law gives him right to protect his possession and repel aggression. PLD 1975 Lah. 152 Waryam etc.
Trespasser's right to defend his possession. Trespasser in settled possession of land is entitled to defend his possession against the rightful owner unless dispossessed by due process of law. PLD 1965 Kar. 637. Raza Muhammad etc.
Possession. Sec. 97, PPC gives right to a person to maintain his existing peaceful possession even by force regardless of fact whether he had or had not lawful right to possess. (SC) PLJ 1976 SC 190 Muhammad Ashraf v. Faiz Ali etc.
Forcibly ploughing field in possession of the accused. Fight ensuing, 3 of accused party killed, one on complainant side. Accused, held acted in defence of person and property. (DB) 1976 P.Cr.LJ 916, Feroz and 9 others.
Forcible entry into house. Deceased and companion suspecting that the accused had stolen their chaff attempted to enter the house of the accused to search and satisfy themselves. Accused resisted and gave blows to the intruders killing one and injuring PWs. Held accused exceeded right of private defence. Conviction altered from 302 to 304 (II) and sentenced to 5 years' R.I. (DB) 1976 P.Cr.LJ 704 Falak Sher etc.
Trespasser cannot claim right of private defence till trespass is brought to an end. PLJ 1983 SC 198. Ghulam Ali v. Rasab etc.
Criminal trespasser given injuries on non-vital parts causing harm to more than necessary when the trespasser fired pistol shots at the accused. Held steps to vacate trespass justified. PLJ 1978 SC 416. Manzoor Hussain v. Col. Faiz Ahmed.
Criminal trespass by complainant party which entered on the land in possession of the accused. Injuries caused to the accused. Held, the accused had the right to cause the death of a member of complainant party. They could not run to the police for help, as by the time they would have returned damage to grass would have been caused. (DB) 48 Cr.LJ 503 Kirpa Ram v. Emp.
Cultivating possession. Accused in cultivating possession of cotton field. Complainant party coming in a body for taking possession of land. Fight ensued between parties with one dead on complainant side and injuries on both sides. Contention that right of private defence could not accrue to the accused until complainant party entered land and started picking cotton not correct. Accused had a right to go out of the field to stop complainant party from committing aggression and right of private defence extended to them. (DB) 1974 P.Cr.LJ 132 Murad Shah.
Retaking possession. Complainant party after being dispossessed of land trying to take back possession by force. Complainant party being aggressors, accused, Held, were within their right to resist by force. Accused received injuries on vital parts of body. One died on complainant side right of private defence not exceeded. (SC) 1974 SCMR 22 Ali Muhammad v. Ali Muhammad etc.
Party in possession of land is attacked and chased by the other party. One of the fleeing persons turning round and killing one of the aggressors. conviction set aside. (SC) 1069 SCMR 569 Nazim v. Crown 1969 P.Cr.LJ 1138.
Where deceased locked the room in possession of accused and stood outside to see that he did not enter the room, although u/S. 103, PPC the deceased had time to have recourse to the authorities, he stabbed the deceased who died as a result thereof, held, the accused had right of defence of property and person. 1990 SCMR 57 Mst. Irshad Begum.
Trespass on property. Defence of property when offence already committed. Complainant trespassed on to the property and started forcible digging. Provisions of section 99, PPC requiring recourse to public authority for protection not attracted. Right of private defence of property accrued to the accused. (DB) 1972 P.Cr.LJ 486 Barkat.
Possession on land by accused confirmed. Accused has right to defend the possession even against the owner till ejected by due process of law. (DB) 1977 P.Cr.LJ 567 Muhammad Buta etc.
Defence of property; "Till the offender has effected his retreat". "Retreat" length of distance covered is immaterial. Retreat is when he attains safety or is out of the reach of the pursuers. (DB) PLD 1960 Lah. 218 Khan Muhammad.
Defence of wife. Deceased assaulting wife of appellant with intention to commit rape. Right of her defence extended to killing of assailant. 1973 P.Cr.LJ 307 Ashiq.
Complainant coming to forcibly take away a girl from accused and causing injuries to them. Accused in retaliation causing injuring to the complainant party and killing one. Held case covered by section 100, P.P.C. Accused acquitted. 1976 P.Cr.LJ 677 Said etc.
Judging the right. Accused is the judge of his own danger when acting in the right of self-defence. (DB) PLD 1972 Lah. 129 Miana. PLD 1965 Lah. 990 Karim.
When the right arises. Right of private defence arises not only when the offences enumerated in the section are committed but also when an attempt to commit or a threat to commit any of such offences is made. (DB) PLD 1960 Lah. 62 Abdul Latif.
Right of private defence against pursuers wanting to arrest for carrying unlicensed arms. Life sentence reduced to 5 years' R.I. (DB) PLD 1951 Lah. 279. Atta Muhammad.
No evidence in support of right of self-defence except accused's own statement. Court against proved background of proved facts and circumstances to consider whether case set up by the accused was reasonably possible. Conviction under section 302, P.P.C. altered to one under section 304 (I). (SC) PLD 1953 FC 93 Safdar Ali. PLD 1963 SC 740 Shamshad.
Doubtful right of self-defence. Complainant party making a concerted attack on accused party who defended themselves. Shots fired by the accused in thick of assault. No definite circumstance showing that the accused were not entitled to exercise complete right of self-defence. Accused given benefit of doubt and acquitted. (SC) 1971 P.Cr.LJ 309. Ahmed Nawaz.
Origin of fight not disclosed, witness suppressing injuries on the accused. Possibility that the accused received injuries to ward off danger to his life. Right of private defence held, extended to the accused in causing grievous hurt. 1975 P.Cr.LJ 673. Jan Muhammad.
Origin of fight not known. The mere fact that the origin of fight or the motive is not known is no reason for assuming that the accused must have acted in the exercise of some right of private defence 48 Cr.LJ 126 Daulat Ram v. K.E.
Reasonable doubt. If reasonable doubt exists about right of private defence the benefit must go to the accused. (DB) 1975 P.Cr.LJ 396 Baradi.
Even in the absence of any evidence in his own defence the accused is entitled to support his plea of right of self-defence. 1994 SCMR 1733, Muhammad Yousaf.
Killing the person who was injuring his brother acquitted by High Court u/S. 103, PPC. Acquittal maintained by the Supreme Court. 1985 SCMR 198. Haji Gul Muhammad v. Muhammad Ramzan.
Good faith not lacking on the part of the appellant and harm caused to save himself not disproportionate to the threatened harm. The appellant is entitled to complete right of private defence. PLJ 1983 SC 128 Muhammad Yousaf etc.
Injuries on accused not explained do not by themselves make it a case of self-defence. (DB) PLJ 1986 Cr. C. (Lah.) 436. Tariq Masih.
Right of private defence is available under Islamic Law, but the plea of self-defence is not available to an aggression. Where Tazkiya-tush-Shahood of eye-witnesses not done the accused could not be convicted u/S. 302(a) PPC. The conviction was altered to u/S. 302(b) PPC. 1992 SCMR 2037, Manzoor etc.
In the exercise of the right of private defence accused killing two innocent persons without intention to kill them as the right of private defence could not have been exercised without taking the risk. Held, the case of the accused was covered by section 106 PPC. Accused acquitted. 1994 SCMR 1161, Liaqat.