LATIF ULLAH vs THE STATE
This matter concerns a petition for leave to appeal against a judgment of the Lahore High Court, which had upheld the petitioner's conviction for murder under section 302(b) of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 but reduced his death sentence to life imprisonment. The petitioner, originally convicted by the trial court, had not challenged his conviction before the High Court, focusing instead on a plea for sentence reduction based on the absence of premeditation and the firing of a single shot. Before the Supreme Court, the petitioner sought to challenge the conviction itself, despite his earlier stance. The Supreme Court reviewed the findings of the lower courts, noting that both had properly appraised the prosecution evidence. The Court held that the petitioner, having accepted his conviction before the High Court, could not now seek to challenge it. Finding no legal infirmity in the High Court's judgment, the Supreme Court dismissed the petition, affirming that the case did not warrant the grant of leave to appeal.
- Can a petitioner challenge a conviction before the Supreme Court if they previously accepted that conviction before the High Court and only sought a reduction in sentence?
- Does the absence of premeditation and the firing of a single shot automatically entitle a convict to a reduction of a death sentence to life imprisonment?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 302(b), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 382-B, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
' FAQIR MUHAMMAD KHOKHAR, L--- The petitioner was tried along with others in case F.I.R. No,16 (Exh.P.A.) dated 31-1-1998 for offences under sections 302/148/149, P.P.C. Registered at Police Station Moch, District Mianwali for.The Qatl-e-Amd of Samiullah son of the complainant Abdullah Khan (P.W.1). The Additional Sessions Judge, Mianwali, vide judgment dated 22-3-2001 convicted the petitioner under section 302(b), P.P.C. As Tazir and sentenced him to death with the further direction to pay a compensation of Rs,2,00,000 to the legal heirs of the deceased and in case of default of payment to suffer six moths' simple imprisonment. However, the other accused were acquitted from the charge by giving them benefit of doubt. Therefore, he preferred Criminal Appeal No,483 of 2001 before the Lahore High Court, Lahore. The trial Court also made a Murder Reference No,296 of 2001 for confirmation or otherwise of the death sentence of the petitioner. During the course of arguments, before the High Court, the petitioner did not challenge his conviction under section 302(b), P.P.C. But only prayed for reduction in sentence on the plea that occurrence had taken place at the spur of the moment without any previous motive or premeditation and that only a single shot was fired. The High Court, vide impugned judgment, dated 29-11-2006 reduced his sentence of death and converted the same to life imprisonment. The compensation of Rs,2,00,000 was also reduced to Rs,1,00,000 and in default of payment thereof he was to further undergo six months' S.I. Benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C. Was also extended to him. The murder reference was answered in the negative.
2. The learned counsel argued that the prosecution had failed to prove its case against the petitioner. Therefore, he was entitled to acquittal notwithstanding the position he had taken before the High Court.
3. On the other hand, the learned Deputy Prosecutor-General, Punjab, submitted that there was sufficient evidence on record to prove the case of murder against the petitioner beyond any shadow of doubt.
4. We have heard the learned counsel as well as the learned Deputy Prosecutor-General, Punjab at length and have also perused the available record. The High Court as well as the trial Court has recorded findings of guilt against the petitioner after proper appraisal of the prosecution evidence and the plea taken by the petitioner. The petitioner accepted his conviction under section 302(b), P.P.C. But sought indulgence of the High Court for the reduction of sentence of death which was accordingly reduced to imprisonment for life. The impugned judgment of the High Court does not suffer from any defect or other legal infirmity. Even, otherwise, this is not a fit case for grant of leave to appeal.
5. For the foregoing reasons, we do not find any merit in this petition which is dismissed and leave to appeal is refused accordingly.
Cited by 4 cases
- The State vs Shakeel Shah 2022 LHC 5220
- RIAZULLAH Versus State 2020 YLRN 115
- MUHAMMAD AYYAZ Versus State 2017 PCrLJN 29
- ALLAH NAWAZ Versus State 2015 PCrLJ 1217