1990 PLP 682 (SCMR)

Ch. Muhammad Abdul Wahid, Advocate Supreme Court and S. Inayat Hussain, Advocate‑on‑Record (absent) for Petitioner. Nemo for the State. Date of hearing: 15th May, 1989. S. USMAN ALI SHAH, J.‑‑The petitioner seeks leave to appeal against the judgment dated 18‑1‑1988 of the Lahore High Court, Bahawalpur Bench. Petitioner Rohani Khan alongwith his brothers Anwar Khan and Islamuddin were charged for the murder of Muhammad Anwar and causing injuries to Bagh Ali (PW‑4), Oasim Ali (PW‑5) and Khushi Muhammad (PW‑6) on 1‑4‑1983 at 12 a.m. in the fields of village Chak No.267/HR Police Station Fort Abbas. The F.I.R. was lodged by Bagh Ali (PW‑5), father of the deceased Muhammad Anwar which was recorded by SHO Muhammad Musa (PW‑8) at 2 p.m. on the same day. After completion of the investigation, all the accused including the petitioner were put to trial before the learned Additional Sessions Judge‑1, Bahawalnagar who, vide his judgment dated 27‑10‑1984, convicted the petitioner Rohani Khan under section 302, P.P.C. and sentenced him to death with a fine of Rs.4,000 or in default of payment to undergo further R.I. for two years. The petitioner and Anwar Khan were also convicted under section 307/34, P.P.C. and sentenced them to 7 years' R.I. with fine of Rs.2,000 or in default of payment to suffer further R.I. for one year. Accused Islamuddin was sentenced to fine of Rs.1,000 under section 323, P.P.C. or in default of payment to suffer R.I. for one year. It was ordered that out of fine, if recovered, Rs.3,000 shall be paid to the heirs of the deceased and Rs.1,500 to the injured P.Ws. in equal shares. 1n appeal before the Lahore High Court, Bahawalpur Bench, vide impugned judgment the conviction under section 302, P.P.C. of the petitioner Rohani Khan was maintained but his sentence of death was reduced to life imprisonment. The sentences of petitioner and Anwar Khan accused under section 307/34, P.P.C. were also reduced to 5 years, R.I. The conviction and sentence of Islamuddin accused was not altered. However, the revision of the complainant party was dismissed. The sentences of Rohani Khan petitioner were ordered to run concurrently and benefit of see . 382‑B, Cr.P.C was also given to him. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and have perused the evidence on record thoroughly. Although this petition is barred by 29 days yet we condone the delay. All that the learned counsel for the petitioner seeks is the reappraisal of evidence on the question of fact which in our opinion, the learned Judges of the High Court have thoroughly sifted. The record shows that there are 16 injuries on the complainant side and three injuries on the accused side. The defence version is not plausible and it appears to be a case of premeditation. The sentence awarded to the petitioners by the learned High Court is in accordance with safe administration of criminal justice. We, therefore, find no merit in this petition which is accordingly dismissed, M.A.K./R‑122/S Petition dismissed.