MUHAMMAD ISLAM vs THE STATE
This matter arises from a criminal petition for leave to appeal filed by Muhammad Islam against his conviction for the murder of Asad. The core legal question was whether the concurrent findings of guilt recorded by the lower courts against the petitioner, based on ocular testimony, suffered from any legal or factual infirmity. The Supreme Court of Pakistan held that the prosecution successfully proved the guilt of the accused through the testimony of the complainant and prosecution witnesses, and no infirmity was found in the concurrent findings. The petition was dismissed as both time-barred and devoid of merit, noting that mitigating circumstances had already been accounted for by awarding imprisonment for life.
- Whether concurrent findings of guilt recorded by lower courts can be interfered with by the Supreme Court in the absence of any legal or factual infirmity?
- Whether a criminal petition barred by time and lacking merit is liable to be dismissed?
ORDER
KHALIL-UR-REHMAN RAMDAY, J.--- Islam petitioner was the solitary accused burdened with knife injuries on the person of Asad deceased. It was found by both the learned Courts that the prosecution had successfully proved his guilt through the testimony of Shafi complainant and Ashraf P.W.
2. We have heard the learned Advocate Supreme Court for 'the petitioner-convict at some length but could not find any infirmity, legal or factual, in the concurrent findings of guilt recorded against the petitioner. The benefit of mitigating circumstances available on record has already been extended to the said convict as he stood punished only with the sentence of imprisonment for life.
3. This petition, which is even otherwise barred by time, is, therefore, dismissed. .