1994 PLP 1675 (SCMR)

(From the judgment/order of Lahore High Court, Lahore, dated 16‑8‑1992 in Cr. Revision No. 316 of 1990). Penal Code (XLV of 1860)‑‑‑ ‑‑‑‑S. 302/34‑‑‑Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)‑‑‑Sentence, enhancement of‑‑‑Trial Court had awarded the sentence of imprisonment for life to the accused for the reasons that he had caused simple injuries on a non- vital part of the body and although he was vicariously liable for the act of killing, but his case called for mitigation in the matter of sentence‑‑‑High Court did not interfere with the said discretion exercised by Trial Court and no justification was found to take a different view in the matter‑‑‑Leave to appeal was consequently refused. ORDER SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.‑‑‑Muhammad Khalid and Bashir Ahmed were convicted by the Sessions Judge, Mianwali, of the offence under section 302, read with section 34, Pakistan Penal Code, for causing the death of Abdul Aziz, deceased. The trial Court sentenced Bashir Ahmed to death and Muhammad Khalid to imprisonment for life. The two convicts filled an appeal against their convictions and sentences. The learned Sessions Judge made a reference to the High Court for confirmation of the sentence of death awarded to Bashir Ahmed. The complainant party also filed a revision petition to seek enhancement of the sentence imposed upon Muhammad Khalid. The High Court dismissed the appeal of the two convicts and the revision petition filed by the complainant party and confirmed the sentence of death awarded to Bashir Ahmad. The two convicts sought leave to appeal from this Court. The leave has since been granted to them with the following observations:‑ "Leave to appeal is granted to examine whether the required independent corroboration was available to lend credibility to the interested evidence which has come on the record and which substantially forms the basis of the conviction and sentence of the petitioners." (See Cr.P.S.LA. No. 269‑L of 1993) Through this petition Din Muhammad, who had lodged the first information report, also prays for leave to appeal to seek enhancement of the sentence awarded to Muhammad Khalid from imprisonment for life to death.

2. In not treating Bashir Ahmed and Muhammad Khalid on the same level in the matter of sentence the learned Sessions Judge observed as follows: "Khalid Khan accused caused simple injuries on a non‑vital part of the body. Although he is vicariously liable for the act of killing, but his case calls for mitigation in the matter of sentence." The High Court did not interfere with the discretion exercised by the trial Court in this regard. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner we see no justification to take a different view in the matter. Accordingly; leave is refused. N,H.Q/D‑105/S. Leave refused.