MUHAMMAD ASLAM vs THE STATE
This matter originated as a petition for leave to appeal against the concurrent findings of the trial court and the High Court, which had sentenced the petitioner to death for an offence under section 302(b) of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The core legal question before the Supreme Court concerned the appropriateness of the death penalty, specifically whether the courts below erred in their sentencing discretion by failing to adequately consider the petitioner's defence plea regarding sudden and grave provocation. The petitioner contended that the courts relied upon his statement under section 342 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, wherein he claimed to have witnessed his wife in a compromising position with the deceased, yet failed to mitigate the sentence accordingly. Upon review, the Supreme Court found that the quantum of punishment warranted thorough re-examination in light of the overall facts and circumstances. Consequently, the Court granted leave to appeal restricted solely to the issue of the quantum of sentence, thereby allowing the petition to proceed to determine whether the capital punishment was justified.
- Can the Supreme Court grant leave to appeal limited strictly to the quantum of sentence?
- Should a defence plea of sudden and grave provocation raised under section 342 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 be considered when determining the quantum of punishment?
- Does the reliance on an accused's statement regarding provocation necessitate a review of the death sentence imposed?
- Section 302(b), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 342, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
ORDER
' RAJA FAYYAZ AHMAD, J.--- Inter alia, it has been contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that both the learned Courts i,e, the learned trial Court and the learned High Court, while sentencing the petitioner to death under section 302(b), P.P.C. Have taken into consideration and placed some reliance on the defence plea taken by the petitioner in his examination under section 342, Cr.P.C. In answer to Question No,17 relating to the sudden and grave provocation for having allegedly seen his wife Mst. Shammi with deceased Muhammad Abbas in compromising position, therefore, the learned counsel in the given facts and circumstances of the case submitted that he shall not press this petition on merits except to the extent of awarding capital punishment.
2. We, having considered the contention noted above put forth on behalf of the petitioner in the light of the evidence available on record, examination of the accused under section 342, Cr.P.C.
And the evidence available on record are of the view that the quantum of punishment requires to be thoroughly considered and examined in the light of the overall facts and circumstances of the case, therefore, are inclined to grant leave to appeal only to the extent of quantum of punishment awarded to the petitioner i,e, death sentence confirmed by the learned High Court vide impugned judgment. Accordingly the petition is allowed. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.