1987 PLP 773 (SCMR)

Date of hearing: 1st February, 1987. MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, J.‑‑Leave to appeal has been sough from judgment, dated 19‑‑3‑1983 of the Lahore High Court, whereby petitioners' Appeal arising out of their conviction in a murder case with sentences of life imprisonment and fine was dismissed. Bashir is the deceased in this case. His elder brother Muhammad Aslam was married to Mst. Nooran, sister of Yaqoob and Waliya petitioner: and Muhammad Ali the acquitted accused. She was maternal‑aunt o1 Hayat petitioner. The relations between Aslam and Nooran were strained. Bashir was suspected by the petitioners to be responsible for the miseries of their sister. Accordingly, they first attacked Muhammad Aslam and gouged his eyes, there is no conviction for this offence, ad it appears, no evidence was led against them. This happened at one place. Thereafter, all the accused went to a field where Bashir deceased was levelling the land. They all uttered Lalkara that they had dealt with Aslam and that Bashir would not be spared. They launched an attack on him when they were variously armed: Yaqub with Kulhari, Waliya with Taqwa and Hayat and Muhammad Ali with Dangs. When Bashir fell down in injured condition he was picked up by the accused and was carried to the gate of their Dhari and then they went away. Bashir later on expired in the hospital. At the trial, ocular account of the occurrence in which Bashir was injured was furnished by Din Muhammad, father‑in‑law of the deceased and Nazar Muhammad. his second cousin. Evidence of recovery of blood‑stained garments of Yaqub and Hayat petitioners and Muhammad Ali acquitted accused as also the recovery of blood‑stained (human) weapons from all the accused, was led against the petitioners. The defence plea was of denial and false implication. It was asserted from the accused‑side that Muhammad Aslam was of bad character and that Bashir had been attacked by unknown assailants, who might be the victims of the decoities committed by Muhammad Aslam. The learned trial Court did not believe the motive part of the prosecution case. It however believed the ocular account given by the eye‑witnesses and the recovery evidence and convicted the petitioners. Muhammad Ali, their co‑accused was acquitted by extension of benefit of doubt as the description of injuries alleged to have been caused by him did not match with the weapon used by him. The High Court, on appeal, reversed the finding of the learned trial Court on question of motive and relying on the eye‑witnesses and the recovery evidence, maintained the conviction and sentences of the petitioners. Learned counsel for the petitioners has contended that the fact that Bashir was found at the Dhari of the accused has not been explained by the prosecution and further that the occurrence did not take place as alleged by the eye‑witnesses. He also contended that the eye‑witnesses not having specified as to which blow had caused which injury, they should not have been relied upon. None of the arguments advanced by the learned counsel raises any question of law or principle. Learned counsel wanted re‑appraisal of the evidence by this Court for which there is no justification. No infirmity, legal or otherwise, has been found regarding the appraisal of the evidence by the High Court. This petition accordingly, is dismissed. S.Q. /Y‑1/S Petition dismissed.