Aamir Hanif and another vs The State and others
This matter concerns a criminal appeal against the conviction of the petitioner for the murder of his brother-in-law and murderous assault on an eyewitness. The core legal questions involved the sufficiency of evidence, the credibility of the eyewitness, and the appropriateness of the sentence imposed by the lower courts. The Supreme Court upheld the conviction, finding that the prosecution's case was established through consistent witness testimony, forensic evidence linking the weapon to the crime, and the prompt reporting of the incident. The Court rejected the defense's theory of substitution, noting that the convict had abandoned such pleas during his examination. Consequently, the Court held that the concurrent findings of the lower courts were well-founded and declined to interfere with the conviction or the sentence of life imprisonment. The key principle laid down is that where prosecution evidence is consistent, independent, and supported by forensic findings, and where the defense fails to substantiate claims of substitution, the conviction must be maintained.
- Can a conviction be sustained when the defense fails to substantiate a plea of substitution during the examination of the accused?
- Is the testimony of an injured witness, who is otherwise independent and has no motive to falsely implicate, sufficient to establish guilt?
- Does the absence of empty casings at the crime scene necessarily undermine the prosecution's case when other forensic evidence, such as blood samples and weapon recovery, is present?
- Section 302(b), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 324, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 342, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
QAZI MUHAMMAD AMIN AHMED, J.---Aamir Hanif, petitioner , along with his sister Samina Bibi, since acquitted, was indicted by a learned Additional Sessions Judge for committing Qatl-i-amd of Mehboob Alam, no other than his brother-in-law and for murderous assault upon Hakeem Nazeer Ahmad (PW-8) on 22.2.2008 at 6:00 p.m. within the remit of Police Station Karana District Sargodha. The incident was reported on the spot by deceased's father Manzoor Ali (PW-7) at 5:30 p.m. It is alleged that the deceased was not getting along well with his wife and in this backdrop on the fateful day family elders gathered to settle the differences; petitioner was also in the session and during the conversation after exhortation repeatedly targeted the deceased with a .30 caliber pistol; Hakeem Nazeer Ahmad PW tried to intervene but was shot instead. Casualties were attended; the deceased succumbed to the injuries at the spot while Hakeem Nazeer Ahmed (PW-8) was shifted to the hospital; he was medically examined at 5:30 p.m. followed by deceased's autopsy at 9:30 p.m. Deceased's wife Mst. Samina Bibi was arrayed as accused for abetment on the basis of supplementary statement dated 28.2.2008. Petitioner was arrested on 4.3.2008; pursuant to a disclosure on 8.3.2008 he led to the recovery of a .30 caliber pistol (P-1). Trial concluded on 13.11.2008 in petitioner's conviction under clause (b) of section 302 of the Pakistan Penal Code, 1860 as well as under section 324 of the Code ibid; he was sentenced to death and imprisonment on coordinate charge; Mst.
Samina Bibi was acquitted vide the same judgment. The High Court maintained petitioner's conviction albeit with alteration of death penalty into imprisonm ent for life vide impugned judgment dated 03.07.2013, vires whereof are being challenged by the convict through a jail petition; the complainant seeks reversal of death penalty as well as Samina Bibi's acquittal; issues bound by a common thread are being decided through this single judgment.
2. Heard. Record perused.
3. The convict is unrepresented and for that we have gone through the entire record with caution and curiosity .
Relationship inter se the deceased and the convict alongside his co-accused is admitted at all hands. Though no casing was secured from the spot, nonetheless, blood taken therefrom is forensically established that of human origin; that confirms the venue. Excluding the strained relations between the spouses, blessed with three siblings there was no motive left to bring the convict face to face with his brother-in-law . Autopsy report confirms three entry wounds, consistent with the weapon recovered on convict's disclosure. Events are recorded with a remarkable promptitude. Occurrence took place at 4:00 p.m.; it is reported after one and half hour with medico legal examination of the injured soon thereaft er; autopsy at 9:30 p.m. in a non tertiary hospital cannot be viewed as delayed. Hakeem Nazeer Ahmed (PW-8), with a stamp of injury , in his early seven ties, is an independent witness; he was requested to join reconciliation when he came out of a nearby mosque after prayer; he has no axe to grind and can be believed without demur . Witnesses are in a comfortable unison on all the relevant details of the incident; cross-examination on the complainant, though inordinately lengthy , merely sets up a case of substitution that merits outright rejection; deceased's murder by his brother Ilyas and his son Azhar , as suggested by the defence, is a story that may not find a buyer. Even the convict himself abandoned the plea in his examination under section 342 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. Even a most stringent appraisal of prosecution evidence does not admit any space to entertain any hypothesis other than convict's guilt. View taken by the courts below being well within the remit of law does not call for interference. Quantum of sentence opted by the High Court has also been found by us as a conscionable wage. Petitions fail. Leave declined.
Cited by 1 case
- GHULAM HYDER Versus State 2021 MLD 1200