1968 P Cr (PLP)

Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S. 302- Petition for Special Leave to Appeal to Supreme Court against conviction-Only ground urged relating to mere appreciation of evidence which, held, is not function of Supreme Court in criminal matters-Lave refused- Constitution of Pakistan (1962), Art. 38(3). Sardar M. Ibrahim Khaki, Advocate Supreme Court instructed by Masood Akhtar Sheikh, Attorney for Petitioner. Nemo for the State. Date of hearing: 20th February 1968. MUHAMMAD YAUB Ali , J.-On the 13th March 1965, at about 5-40 p.m. the petitioner in full public view shot dead his fellow policeman Abdul Razzaq, deceased, and injured his relative Abdul Aziz, P. W. near the Empress Market, Karachi. He was apprehended and disarmed on the spot and handed over to Muhammad Sarwar, Head Constable, who had arrived in the meantime. Besides Abdul Aziz and Muhammad Sarwar direct evidence of the crime was furnished by Muhammad Saeed (P. W. 6) and Kamal (P. W.) another fellow companion of the petitioner whose statement, recorded during the commitment proceedings, was on account of his non-availability during the trial admitted into evidence under section 33 of the Evidence Act. None of these witnesses had any motive to falsely implicate the petitioner. They had neither enmity with the petitioner nor with the exception of Abdul Aziz any special interest in the deceased. The defence offered by the petitioner was that he was pursued, and first attacked from behind with a knife by the deceased which blow he succeeded in warding off by kicking, at him, but in the meantime Kamal, P. W., away his (petitioner's) revolver and fired at him, but the shot instead hit the deceased. No witnesses were examined in support of the plea which on its face was untrue. If the deceased had in fact approached the petitioner from behind and aimed a knife blow at him he would have undoubtedly succeeded in causing him an injury. Similarly if Kamal (P. W.) had by a mischance hit his own companion he would not have followed it by firing two more shots one of which hit the deceased and the other Abdul Aziz (P. W.). The evidence in support of the charge being overwhelming the Courts below had no other course open, but to convict the petitioner and to award him the extreme penalty of death as the crime was attended upon by aggravating circumstances, namely, killing by fire-arm during day time in full public view. The other grounds raised in support of the petition go to mere appreciation of evidence which is not the function of this A Court in criminal matters. The petition is dismissed. Leave refused.