SCMR 1999

1999 PLP 869 (SCMR)

BILALAHMAD — Appellant Versus THE STATE — Respondent

Jurisdiction / Court
supreme Court of Pakistan
Decided Date
Criminal Appeal No.424 of 1995, decided on 22nd October, 1998.
Honorable Judges
Raja Afrasiab Khan, Sh. Ijaz Nisar and
Case Reference Summary (AEO Optimized)
Citation 1999 PLP 869 (SCMR)
Forum / Court supreme Court of Pakistan
Bench Members Raja Afrasiab Khan, Sh. Ijaz Nisar and
Parties BILALAHMAD — Appellant Versus THE STATE — Respondent
Primary Law (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860), (a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)
💡 Quick Legal QA & Summary / سوال و جواب خلاصہ
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 1999 PLP 869 (SCMR)?

This judgment primarily cites: (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860), (a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860) as referenced in Pakistani case law index.

Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 1999 PLP 869 (SCMR)?

The case was heard and decided by the supreme Court of Pakistan bench comprising: Raja Afrasiab Khan, Sh. Ijaz Nisar and.

Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?

Cite this legal precedent as: 1999 PLP 869 (SCMR) (BILALAHMAD — Appellant Versus THE STATE — Respondent). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.

Laws Cited

(b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860) (a) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

Representation

  • Sh. Khizar Hayat, Advocate Supreme Court with Tanvir Ahmad, Advocate-on-Record for Petitioner.
  • Date of hearing: 22nd October, 1998.
  • M. Zaman Bhatti, Advocate Supreme Court with Rao M. Yousaf Khan. Advocate-on-Record for the State.

Headnotes / Summary

(On appeal from the judgment/order, dated 6-6-1995, of the Lahore High Court, Bahawalpur Bench, Bahawaplur, passed in Criminal Appeal No.33 of 1993/BWP--M.R. No. 15 of 1993/BWP).

S. 302

Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)

Re-appraisal' of evidence

Leave to appeal was granted to re-appraise prosecution evidence and to consider as to whether it was believable that accused would venture to catch deceased at an odd hour to fulfil his sexual lust.

S. 302

Sentence

Re-appraisal of evidence--Ocular evidence of natural witnesses stood corroborated by medical evidence, but motive set up by prosecution for occurrence was improbable

Accused was a married person having grown up daughters, it was, thus, unbelievable that he would force deceased who was his brother's wife to subject her to his sexual lust and that too during day time in presence of deceased's close relations

Motive of occurrence being shrouded in mystery, accused was entitled to lesser sentence provided for offence of murder

Sentence of death awarded to accused was converted to imprisonment for life. M. Zaman Bhatti, Advocate Supreme Court with Rao M. Yousaf Khan. Advocate-on-Record for the State.

Judgment & Decree

SH. IJAZ NISAR, J.

This appeal, with the leave of the Court, is directed against the judgment, dated 6-6-1995, passed by the Lahore High Court, whereby it confirmed the sentence of death awarded to the appellant by the learned slat Court.

2. On 7-2-1991 a case under section 302, P.P.C. was registered against Bilal Ahmad appellant on the statement of Habibullah P.W.1. father of Mst. Rabia Bibi deceased on the allegations that at about 1-00 p.m. Bilal Ahmad appellant called the deceased inside his residential room and tried to commit rape upon her and when she resisted he fired pistol shots at her within the sight of Habibullah P.W.L. Saifullah P.W.2. and Jamil Akhtar (not examined) which resulted in her death. Mst. Rabia Bibi deceased was stated to be married to the step-brother of Bilal Ahmad appellant.

3. The learned trial Court relying on the testimony of Haibiullah P.W.1 and Saifullah P.W.2 convicted the appellant under section 302, P.P.C. and sentenced him to death.

4. Leave was granted by this Court on 17-9-1995 to re-appraise the prosecution evidence and whether it was believable that the appellant would venture to catch the deceased at such an odd hour to fulfil his sexual lust.

5. So far as the ocular testimony as furnished by Habibullah and Saifullah P.Ws. is concerned. We see no defect in the same as both were the natural witnesses and stand corroborated by the medical evidence. However, the motive set up by them for the occurrence appears to be improbable, for, there wire no walls of Ahata where the appellant was residing and was alleged to have forcibly taken the deceased to his Kotha. Furthermore, he would not have dared do so in the day light when the father and brother of the deceased were also present in the close proximity. The appellant is stated to be a married person having grown up daughters, in this view of the matter, it is unbelievable that he would force his brother's wife to subject herself to his sexual lust and that too during day time in the presence of her close relations.

6. Taking stock of these factors, we think that the motive is shrouded in mystery which entitles the appellant to lesser sentence provided for the offence of murder. We, therefore, partly accept the appeal and while maintaining his conviction alter his sentence from death to imprisonment for life plus the same fine/compensation as awarded by the learned trial Court with benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C. H.B.T/B-27/S Order accordingly.