Pakistan Case Law
2017 SCMR 201

KHALID MEHMOOD vs The STATE

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation2017 SCMR 201
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Criminal Appeal No, 97 of 2011 Criminal Appeal No,229 of 2005 Murder
Date2016-11-14
Judge(s)Asif Saeed Khan Khosa, Dost Muhammad Khan and Sardar Tariq Masood
Authored byAsif Saeed Khan Khosa
ResultAppeal dismissed
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

The appellant challenged his convictions and death sentence under Sections 302(b), 324, and various sub-sections of Section 337 of the Pakistan Penal Code (P.P.C.) for murdering his wife and brother-in-law, and injuring three others. Leave to appeal was granted to determine if Sections 306, 307, and 308 of the P.P.C. applied to the case, and whether mitigating circumstances existed to reduce the death sentence to life imprisonment. The Supreme Court of Pakistan dismissed the appeal, holding that Sections 306, 307, and 308 of the P.P.C. are applicable exclusively to cases of Qisas and have no relevance to cases of Ta'zir. On the question of mitigation, the Court observed that the appellant acted with extreme brutality, using a pistol and a screw-driver to gouge out the eyes of some victims. Consequently, the Court found no mitigating circumstances to warrant a reduction in sentence, maintaining the convictions and death penalty.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Whether the provisions of Sections 306, 307, and 308 of the Pakistan Penal Code apply to cases of Ta'zir?
  • Can a death sentence be reduced to life imprisonment on the ground of mitigation if the offender acted with extreme brutality and mercilessness?
  • Are the statutory provisions governing Qisas relevant to a trial and conviction under Ta'zir?
Laws & provisions referred
  • sections 302 and 324, P.P.C.
  • sections 302(b), 324, 337-F(iii), 337-A(i), 337-D, 337-F(iii), 337-F(i) and 337-A(i), P.P.C.
  • ections 306, 307 and 308, P.P.C.
  • sections 306, 307 and 308, P.P.C.
death sentencemitigating circumstancesQisasTa'zirmurderbrutalitysentence reduction

' ASIF SAEED KHAN KHOSA, J.---Khalid Mehmood appellant had been booked and tried in case FIR No, 272 registered at Police Station City C-Division, Rahim Yar Khan on 06.11.2001 for offences under sections 302 and 324, P.P.C. And after a full-dressed trial he was convicted by the trial court for offences under sections 302(b), 324, 337-F(iii), 337-A(i), 337-D, 337-F(iii), 337-F(i) and 337-A(i), P.P.C. And on the charge of murder he was sentenced to death and to pay compensation. All the convictions and sentences of the appellant were subsequently upheld by the. High Court and his sentence of death was confirmed by it. Hence, the present appeal by leave of this Court granted on 31.03.2011.

2. Leave to appeal had been granted in this case in order to examine as to whether the case against the appellant attracted the provisions of ections 306, 307 and 308, P.P.C. Or not and also to consider as to whether any mitigating circumstance was available on the record or not for reduction of the appellant's sentence of death to imprisonment for life on the charge of murder.

3. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and going through the record we have straightaway observed that the law has been settled by this Court through an authoritative judgment rendered in the case of Zahid Rehman v. The State (PLD 2015 SC 77) and it has been clarified that the provisions of sections 306, 307 and 308, P.P.C. Are relevant only to a case of Qisas and not to that of Ta'zir . The case in hand was surely a case of Ta'zir and not that of Qisas. As regards the question regarding mitigation of the appellant's sentence we have noticed that in the backdrop of strained relations with his wife and her shifting to her brother's house the appellant had not only killed his wife and brother but had also injured three others. For committing the said offences the appellant had not only used a pistol but also a screw-driver with the use of which he had tried to take out the eyes of some of his victims. The record makes it abundantly clear that the appellant had acted in the matter brutally and mercilessly and that he is a desperate person evoking no sympathy in the matter of his sentence. This appeal is, therefore, dismissed and all the convictions and sentences of the appellant recorded and upheld by the courts below are maintained.

Cited by 13 cases

For educational and research use only — not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.