2008 PLP 83 (SCMR)

RAJA FAYYAZ AHMAD, J.

Petitioner Muhammad Ilyas has been convicted by the learned trial Court under section 302(b), P.P.C. and sentenced to death as Ta'zir for committing Qatl-e-Amd of his own cousin Liaqat deceased in his house, while relaxing on the cot, where also the complainant Nasir (P.W.5) and Rehmat Bibi respectively being the real brother and mother of the deceased were present. Also, the learned trial Court found the petitioner liable to pay Rs.1,00,000 by way of compensation to the L.Rs. of the deceased under section 544-A, Cr.P.C. The petitioner through Criminal Appeal No.125 of 2005 challenged his conviction and sentence before the learned Peshawar High Court, Abbottabad Bench. The record and proceedings of the case were sent to the learned High Court for confirmation of the sentence of death awarded to the petitioner as envisaged by section 374, Cr.P.C. vide impugned judgment, the learned High Court answered the Murder Reference No.6 of 2006 in affirmative by confirming the sentence of death, accordingly, dismissed the criminal jail appeal of the petitioner.

2. The petitioner challenged his conviction before the learned High Court. The petitioner's learned counsel submitted that the alternative sentence of life imprisonment will meet the ends of justice, rather, pressing the petition on merits: Also the learned counsel for the petitioner before the learned High Court contested the appeal only on the quantum of sentence and did not press the same on merits. The learned High Court notwithstanding the appeal having not been pressed on merits, still considered the merits of the case particularly in view of the murder reference and thus; after attending to all the material aspects of the case maintained the conviction and sentence of the petitioner and in view of the submission of the learned counsel who appeared for the petitioner before the learned High Court but did not find it appropriate and justified in the given circumstances of the case to award lesser sentence of imprisonment for life. The simplicitor denial on the part of the petitioner in his examination before the learned trial Court under section 342, Cr.P.C. has been found totally misconceived, baseless and highly improbable in the given circumstances of the case. Undisputedly, the petitioner was addict of heroine who demanded money from the deceased and on his refusal to provide him the money, after a short while entered into the house of the deceased, caused a fatal solitary injury with a formidable weapon while the deceased was lying on the cot in his house, who was also the cousin of the petitioner.

3. The learned counsel for the petitioner as earlier urged on behalf of the petitioner before the learned High Court submitted that an alternative sentence of life imprisonment would meet the ends of justice in the circumstances of the case, therefore, extreme penalty of death may not be found by this Court to be an appropriate sentence, as according to the learned counsel; father of the petitioner has already passed away and the petitioner due to addiction was suffering badly in his mental faculties which stood impaired drastically. No material as to the mental faculties of the petitioner, at the relevant time as having been affected adversely is available on the record to consider the question of imposition of the alternative sentence of life imprisonment in the given circumstances of the case as also highlighted in the impugned judgment. There is no justification to consider the question of imposition of lesser sentence in the circumstances of the case. Both the learned Courts i.e. the learned trial Court and the learned High Court have concurrently found the petitioner guilty on the charge to whom appropriate legal sentence has been passed and maintained by the learned High Court, which is unexceptionable. Thus, this petition being without any merits is dismissed. Leave refused. H.B.T./M-105/SC Petition dismissed.