MUHAMMAD WARYAM vs THE STATE
This criminal appeal challenges the conviction and sentence of the appellant under Section 302(c) of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, resulting from a trial court judgment where he was sentenced to 14 years rigorous imprisonment for the murder of two individuals found in his house under compromising circumstances. The core legal question concerned whether the appellant acted under grave and sudden provocation and ghairat (honor), and whether the defence plea should be accepted when the occurrence took place inside the accused's private dwelling and is supported by medical and forensic evidence. The Lahore High Court held that the defence version, indicating the appellant caught the deceased in an illicit situation in his house at odd hours during Ramadan, inspired confidence and was fully proved. The court maintained the conviction under Section 302(c) of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 but reduced the sentence to the period already undergone, noting that where the prosecution case fails or is uncorroborated, a credible defence plea must be accepted in its entirety. The key principle laid down is that if the defence plea is plausible and supported by circumstances and forensic evidence, it must be accepted in its entirety when the prosecution evidence is insufficient, warranting a reduction in sentence for grave and sudden provocation.
- Whether a defence plea of grave and sudden provocation and ghairat can be accepted when dead bodies are found inside the accused's house?
- Should a plausible defence plea be accepted in its entirety when supported by medical and chemical examiner reports?
- Can the appellate court maintain a conviction under Section 302(c) of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 while reducing the sentence to the period already undergone?
- Section 302(C), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 382-B, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
- Section 342, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
' This judgment will dispose of Criminal Appeal No,124-J of 2002 filed by Muhammad Waryam appellant, through jail, who was convicted under section 302(C), P.P.C. And sentenced to 14 years'
R.I. With the benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C. Vide judgment dated 12-12-2001 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sheikhupura.
2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that on 8-1-1999 when the complainant along with others reached near the residence of Muhammad Waryam while searching for Shahbaz, they witnessed that due to shots fired by Muhammad Waryam and his seven co-accused, Shahbaz and Kausar Bibi (daughter of the accused) received injuries and died at the spot.
3. As a result of investigation conducted by Muhammad Yar S.-I., P.W.9, all the eight accused were challaned to face the trial. During the investigation, inquest reports and injury statements of the deceased were prepared, blood stained earth was taken into possession from the spot, five crime empties of 12 bore gun were recovered from the spot and on 27-1-1999 Waryam appellant and others accused were arrested. During the police custody, apart from other accused, Waryam led to the recovery of 12 bore gun P.3 which was taken into possession vide memo. Exh. P . L.
4. At the trial, prosecution in order to prove its case produced 10 witnesses in all. Then the learned S.P.P. Tendered in evidence report of the Chemical Examiner Exh.P.V. And closed the case of the prosecution. Statements of the accused were recorded under section 342, Cr.P.C. In which except Waryam, the remaining accused pleaded false implication while Waryam pleaded that he killed both the deceased on account of grave and sudden provocation as also Ghairat. After conclusion of the trial, except Waryam, all the remaining 7 accused were acquitted by the learned trial Court.
5. Learned counsel for the appellant appointed at State expense submits that the appellant has confessed his guilt before the trial Court, ocular account is fully corroborated by medical evidence and that the appellant has been rightly convicted and sentenced by the learned trial Court.
6. Learned counsel for the State also supports the judgment of the trial Court.
7. I have heard arguments and have gone through the evidence on record. The occurrence had taken place in the house of the appellant. Both the dead bodies of deceased namely Shahbaz and Kausar Bibi, daughter of the appellant were found in the house of the appellant. At this stage, I would like to reproduce paragraph 37 of the impugned judgment of the trial Court which reads as under:- "In such situation when the prosecution case and defence plea are to be examined in juxtaposition, the latter appeals to reasons and rings true. Moreover, the positive report of the Chemical Examiner in respect of swa bs Exh.P.U. Also supports the defence plea. The prosecution at first instance withheld this report and later on produced the same when accused party applied for its summoning. Later on, the prosecution made an attempt to establish that Mst. Kausar Bibi was married Inayat accused and as such this positive report was of no utility. Suffice to say that the complainant in his statement has remained mum regarding this relationship of Inayat with Kausar Bibi. Worth mentioning that in first part of his examination in chief, he had fully given the details of the relationship of the accused persons inter se. Even for the sake of arguments, this positive report is not taken into consideration, the defence version appeals to the reason. Shahbaz deceased had visited the house of Waryam accused in odd hours at the night for commission of zina."
' Warym appellant had murdered Shahbaz and Kausar Bibi when he saw both the deceased in a compromising position and that too in the month of holy Ramzanul-Mubarak. The law of the land is that if the prosecution evidence is unreliable or untrustworthy, then the defence plea is to be accepted in its entirety and given effect to and not a part accepted and a part rejected. Reliance is placed on the case of Muhammad Nazir v. Tariq and another 1992 SCM R 983. The dead bodies of both the deceased having been found in the house of the appellant, Shahbaz deceased having visited the house of the appellant at night time on odd hours and positive report of Chemical Examiner with regard to vaginal swa bs of deceased Mst. Kausar, the defence plea of the appellant is fully proved and inspires confidence. So while accepting the defence plea of the appellant in its entirety, I hold that the appellant Waryam committed murder of both the deceased under grave and sudden provocation as also on account of Ghairat. In these circumstances, though conviction of the appellant is maintained under section 302(c), P.P.C. But the sentence is reduced to one already undergone by him.
' The occurrence had taken place on 8-1-1999. The appellant was arrested on 27-1-1999 and was never allowed bail. He is in jail for the last more than five (5) years and shall be released forthwith, if not required to be detained in any other case. With reduction in the quantum of sentence, the appeal filed by the convict appellant stands disposed of.