MUHAMMAD ABBAS alias ABBASIO vs THE STATE

ORDER

' TASSADUQ HUSSAIN JILLANI, J.--- Petitioner seeks leave to appeal against the judgment of the Lahore High Court, dated 19-9-2002 vide which his Criminal Appeal No,412 of 1998 against the judgment of the trial Court dated 22-4-1998 was dismissed and sentence of death was confirmed.

2. Petitioner was tried along with Muhammad Saleem for the murder of Abdul Majeed alias Kala.

The prosecution story is that on the fateful day (which was Eid) day at about 1-30 p.m. The complainant Muhammad Nazeer P.W.3 along with his brothers Abdul Majeed alias Kala (deceased) and Abdur Rashid went to the house of the former's in-laws (Abdul Majeed's in-laws). On the way Abdul Majeed alias Kala parted company 'with them to bring some sweets from the sweet shop and the rest went to his in-laws. After a while there was a little commotion. The complainant along with his brother Abdur Rashid and Muhammad Aslam son of Mukhtar (father-in-law of Abdul Majeed alias Kala) came out of the house and saw that Abdul Majeed was being belaboured by Muhammad Abbas petitioner and within their view he gave him two dagger blows on his leg and left shoulder which proved fatal and he died.

' During the trial the prosecution examined 15 witnesses including the doctor and the Investigating Officer. The motive alleged in the F.I.R. Was that one and half year back the complainant -got a case registered vide F.I.R. No,113 of 1993 at Police Station city Wazirabad against Muhammad Abbas and his companions and they nourished grudge against him on that count. The ocular account was furnished by Muhammad Nazeer (P.W.3) and Muhammad Aslam (P.W.4). The learned trial Court vide judgment dated 22-4-1998 while acquitting Muhammad Saleem convicted Muhammad Abbas under section 302(b), P.P.C. And sentenced him to death and to pay a fine of Rs,50,000 and it was directed that in case of default in the payment of fine he shall undergo R.I. For one year and on realization of the fine an amount of Rs,30,000 shall be paid to the legal heirs of the deceased as compensation.

3. The petitioner challenged his conviction and sentence before learned Lahore High Court by filing appear. The High Court while maintaining the conviction and sentence of the petitioner dismissed his appeal. However, the sentence of fine awarded to the petitioner was converted from fine to compensation within the meaning of section 544-A, Cr.P.C.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks leave on the ground that both the witnesses are interested witnesses, that the motive has not been proved. As an alternative he also pleaded for lesser sentence on the ground that the immediate motive remained shrouded in mystery, therefore, capital punishment is not warranted.

5. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner we are of the view that the concurrent findings of conviction rendered by the trial Court as also by learned High Court are unexceptionable. It was a broad-daylight occurrence, F.I.R. Was lodged within 15 minutes of the occurrence and a specific role was assigned to Muhammad Abbas petitioner. Statement of complainant Muhammad Nazeer P.W.3 is consistent with the version given in the F.I.R. The same stands corroborated by P.W.4 Muhammad Aslam, the medical evidence and the evidence of recovery. Of course both these P.Ws.

Are related to the deceased but it is a settled proposition of law that mere relationship would not discredit a witness unless his evidence does not inspire confidence, i.e, discrepant is belied by the medical evidence or there was any motive to falsely implicate the accused. The prosecution evidence is not reflective of these infirmities. Coming to the question of sentence we note that the petitioner acted in a brutal manner on Eid day and killed Abdul Majeed alias Kala. The sentence, therefore, does not call for interference.

6. For what has been discussed above we do not find any merit in this petition, which is dismissed and leave is refused.