2004 PLP 952 (SCMR)

Nemo for the State. Date of hearing: 12th November, 2003. SH. RIAZ AHMAD, C.J.‑‑Both the captioned petitions for leave to appeal assail the validity of a common judgment dated 6‑6‑2002, whereby, the learned Division Bench of the Lahore High Court confirmed the death sentences of petitioners Amjad Iqbal Butt and Muhammad Ishaq while reduced the death sentences of the petitioners Ghulam Hussain, Muhammad Asghar, Ashiq Butt, Ansar, Sadiq and Sabir Hussain on the charge under section 302(b) read with section 149, Pakistan Penal Code with direction that each of them shall pay compensation of Rs.2,00,000 to legal heirs, of deceased family in terms of section 544‑A Criminal Procedure Code, or in default whereof, to suffer further S.I. for six months each. Their conviction and sentences on the charge under section 449 were also maintained. All sentences were ordered to run concurrently with benefit as contemplated by section 382‑B, Cr.P.C. As regards rest of the eight accused namely Muhammad Naeem, Muhammad Saleem, Javed Butt, Allah Ditta, Fiaz Ahmed, Gulzar alias Gulla, Azam and Aimal Khan, learned Judges came to the conclusion that prosecution had not established its case against them beyond reasonable shadow of doubt, therefore, they were acquitted of the charges. +

2. With the assistance of Khawaja Sultan Ahmed, Senior Advocate Supreme Court and Mr. M.A. Zafar, Advocate Supreme Court representing the petitioners in both these petitions, we have perused the judgment of the High Court and after careful consideration of the contentions raised from both sides, we are inclined to grant leave to appeal to consider the following questions:‑‑ (i) What is the evidentiary value of C.W.‑4 Tasadaq Hasan, S.P., Gujrat, and as to whether on the basis of his findings, could the A High Court base its conclusion thereon; (ii) What is the effect of the failure on the part of the complainant to disclose the names of the culprits in the F.I.R. in the first instance, and secondly, when the application was submitted by him to the higher police officers none was mentioned as responsible for the commission of crime, and again, in the writ petition the complainant failed to mention the names of the accused responsible for the commission of crime, but simply stated that 12 unknown persons could be identified by him if they were produced before him; (iii) One of the Investigating Officer had found Nasir Mosia and Sharafat Lohar responsible for the commission of crime, but both of them were killed in police encounter: (iv) What is the effect of the supplementary statement of complainant Muhammad Anwar and that too after one and a half month of the occurrence, in which roles were attributed and the accused were named; (v) If at all the prosecution is to be believed, was the High Court justified in acquitting the respondents in Cr.P. 612‑L of 2002. Leave granted in the terms indicated ibid. Respondents in Criminal Petition No.612‑L of 2002 shall not be released from jail until the final disposal of these appeals. N.H.Q./A‑6/S Leave granted.