1988 PLP 131 (SCMR)

S.A. NUSRAT, J.--Muhammad Yaseen petitioner was tried alongwith his brother Muhammad Hussain by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Lahore of an offence under section 302/34, P.P.C. for causing the death of Muhammad Boota deceased. The petitioner was sentenced to death while Muhammad Hussain was sentenced to life imprisonment. Both the accused were also directed to pay fine in the sum of Rs.2,000 each or in default thereof, to suffer R.I. for a period of two years each. On appeals filed by them, Muhammad Hussain was acquitted by the learned High Court while the conviction of the petitioner under section 302, P.P.C. was maintained, but the sentence of death awarded to him was not confirmed and instead was substituted with imprisonment for life. Leave is now sought by the petitioner from the judgment of the learned High Court. 2. According to the prosecution, the petitioner armed with a .12 bore pistol alongwith his brother Muhammad Hussain, empty handed, came to the shop of Muhammad Hanif, P.W. 10, where Muhammad Boota deceased was sitting. Muhammad Hussain raised 1lalkara' and the petitioner fired a pistol shot at Muhammad Boota, which hit him near the neck, as a result of which he fell on the ground. He was removed to the nearby house where he died within few minutes. The accused ran away from the spot and were arrested later on 29-7-1978. 3. The deceased had eight multiple lacerated wounds on the right side of the neck caused by the discharge of a fire-arm. Their margins were blackened. According to the doctor, these wounds were sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. 4. The accused pleaded not guilty and it was alleged that on the day of occurrence, their unmarried sister Mst. Rashidan, was alone in her house. The deceased entered the house with a pistol and tried to commit rape upon her, who resisted and during the scuffle, the pistol went off hitting the deceased. The entire evidence in the case was duly sifted and appreciated by the learned two Courts. The learned High Court did not give much credence to the testimony of Ali Muhammad, but the presence of Lal Din, Saliman and Muhammad Hanif was considered to be relevant and was relied upon as being free from any doubt. The learned High Court believed that the occurrence had taken place as alleged by the prosecution at the shop of Muhammad Hanif wherefrom recovery of a number of blood-stained articles and pellets was made. The defence plea, as mentioned above, was rejected. However, in awarding the sentence, the learned High Court noticed that the petitioner had acted from a motive to rehabilitate his family honour. In this view of the matter, the sentence was altered from death to life imprisonment. 5. It was contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that it was a case of grave and sudden provocation which was not appreciated by the learned High Court. The learned counsel took us through the evidence, which we have examined, but are afraid that the contention raised by him is not sustainable. He was unable to point out any legal infirmity in the judgment of the learned High Court. No rule or principle of law governing dispensation of criminal justice appears to have been violated in the case. The petition, therefore, has no merits and is dismissed. 6. After hearing the learned counsel, we are satisfied that the learned High Court was justified, in the facts and circumstances of the case, to convert the sentence of death into life imprisonment insofar as Muhammad Yaseen is concerned and likewise Muhammad Hussain was rightly acquitted of the charge. Cr. P.S.L.A. No. 192 of 1982 too, has no merits and is dismissed accordingly. M.I. /M-234/S Petitions dismissed.