Allah Ditta Waddani vs Muhammad Nawaz & Other
This matter arises from a petition for leave to appeal directed against the judgment of the High Court, whereby one respondent was acquitted of murder charges and murder reference answered in negative, and another respondent's conviction under section 302(b) of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 was converted to section 302(c) with a reduced sentence. The core legal question concerns the reappraisal of prosecution evidence, the credibility of eye-witnesses and medical evidence regarding injuries sustained by the accused at the time of arrest, and the validity of a plea of grave and sudden provocation or 'Ghairat' where the victims were legally married. The Supreme Court held that the findings of the High Court regarding the presence of injuries on the accused and the plea of provocation require further consideration upon re-evaluation of the evidence. Consequently, leave to appeal was granted, and orders were issued for the release of one respondent on bail and the issuance of bailable warrants for the other.
- Whether the High Court was justified in acquitting the respondent by disbelieving eye-witnesses and medical evidence on the ground of injuries sustained by the accused?
- Whether a plea of murder on account of Ghairat is acceptable when evidence proves the victims were lawfully married?
- Whether leave to appeal should be granted for re-evaluation of prosecution evidence in a double murder case?
- Section 302(b), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 302(c), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 382-B, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 342, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
JUDGMENT IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, J.- We have heard learned counsel for the parties and also gone through the impugned judgment passed by learned High Court in pursuance whereof respondent, Muhammad Nawaz son of Jan Muhammad has been acquitted of the charge of murder of Mst. Kalsoom Mai and Kattu Khan as a result whereof Murder Reference No. 314 of 2000 submitted by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Dera Ghazi Khan for the confirmation of sentence of death was answered in negative. Whereas conviction and sentence awarded to respondent, Abdul Karim by learned Trial Court under section 302(b), P.P.C. Was converted to section 302(c), P.P.C. And he was sentenced to undergo 10 years' R.I. On each count with the benefit of section 382- B, Cr.P.C. He was undergone the sentence, as per information conveyed by petitioner's counsel.
2. Learned High Court, on accepting the plea of respondent, Muhammad Nawaz, that he was not present at the time of incident, disbelieved the eye-witnesses as well as medical evidence on the ground that he had received injuries with blunt weapon. In our opinion, notwithstanding, the fact whether the injuries were with blunt or sharp weapon, the act remains that he was found injured on the date of arrest .e. 28.4.1999, therefore, Dr. Khalid Naveed, PVY-7 examined lim on 29.4.1999 and noticed following injuries on his person:~ "On examination an oblique transverse lacerated of 5 c.m. x 5 c.m. With ill defined irregular margin and the wound was already dressed with A.S.D. The wound was skin deep' and muscle deep situated on left upper leg below knee joint. The wound was kept under observation. The injury was caused by blunt weapon."
3. Similarly, we are of the opinion that plea taken by Abdul Karim for causing the murders of Mst.
Kalsoom Mai and Kattu Khan, on account of "Ghairat" because as per his statement under section 342, Cr.P.C. He had seen them in a compromising position is, prima facie, not acceptable as evidence is available on record that they were husband and wife as their Nikah took place a few days before the happening of the incident. Thus, this aspect of the case also requires further consideration.
4. For the foregoing reasons as well re-evaluate the prosecution evidence, leave to appeal is granted in the interest of justice.
5. Muhammad Nawaz, respondent was released from custody after his acquittal by the learned High Court and now he has been arrested and produced before us, therefore, pending decision of the appeal, arising out of this petition, he is ordered to be released on bail, subject to furnishing bail bond in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- with two' sureties and P.R. In the like amount to the satisfaction of Additional Sessions Judge, Dera Ghazi Khan. Bailable warrants in the sum of Rs. 50,000/-, to procure attendance of respondent, Abdul Karim be issued, returnable to the Registrar of this Court.