Pakistan Case Law
PLJ 2021 SC (Cr.C.) 343

Ghulam Abbas and another vs State

⭐ Prefer in Google
CitationPLJ 2021 SC (Cr.C.) 343
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Crl. P. Nos. 9-Q and 12 of 2021
Date2021-04-06
Judge(s)Mushir Alam, Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, Yahya Afridi
ResultPetition dismissed
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

This matter arises from criminal petitions filed against the judgment of the High Court of Balochistan, which maintained the convictions and sentences of the petitioners for Qatl-i-Amd and screening of incriminatory evidence. The core legal question involves the appraisal of ocular testimony, red-handed arrest, and the extent of culpability for screening evidence under Section 201 of the Pakistan Penal Code, 1860. The Supreme Court held that the ocular account was consistent and reliable, and the red-handed arrest established the guilt of the principal accused beyond reasonable doubt, leading to the dismissal of his petition for leave to appeal. However, regarding the co-accused convicted of screening evidence, assistance provided to the injured victim warranted a mitigation in sentence. The Court laid down the principle that while assisting an injured victim does not absolve an accused of screening evidence, it can serve as a mitigating circumstance in determining the quantum of sentence.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Whether red-handed arrest at the spot forecloses avenues to entertain hypotheses other than the assassin's guilt?
  • Does assisting an injured victim to the hospital absolve an accused from the charge of screening incriminatory evidence?
  • Can assistance provided to a deceased person in an injured condition be considered as a mitigating circumstance to reduce the quantum of sentence?
Laws & provisions referred
  • Section 302(b), Pakistan Penal Code 1860
  • Section 201, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
Qatl-i-Amdscreening of evidencered-handed arrestocular accountmitigation of sentencecriminal petition

Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, J.--Ghulam Abbas petitioner was tried by a learned Additional Sessions Judge at Quetta for committing Qatl-i-Amd of Ameer Muhammad, 35/40, a supervisor employed in a restaurant at 6:15 p.m. on 10.8.2013; Naqeebullah petitioner , one of the owners of the outlet, was also in the dock for having screened off incriminatory evidence; they were returned a guilty verdict vide judgment dated 17.03.2017; the former convicted under clause (b) of Section 302 of the Pakistan Penal Code, 1860 was sentence d to imprisonment for life with a direction to pay compensation whereas the latter was convicted under Section 201 of the Code ibid; he was sentenced to 5-years' R.I. The incident occurred all of a sudden in the wake of an altercation that started over a demand of drink by the principal accused. The High Court of Balochistan maintained convictions as well as sentences recorded thereunder vide impugned judgment 21.12.2020, being assailed through separate petitions.

Bound by a common thread, these are being decided through this single judgment.

2. According to the prosecution, the deceased served at the food outlet while Ghula m Abbas associated as a guard with Naqeebullah petitioner . On the fateful day, Ghulam Abbas asked the deceased for a drink who demanded a chit to oblige; former , however , got infuriated and shot him in the abdomen; he was subdued by the witnesses at the spot with the weapon, latter taken by Naqeebullah petitioner , who withheld it throughout. Ocular account furnished by Muhammad Awais (PW-1) and Muhammad Afzal (PW-2), with an inspiring unanimity , narrated the graphic details of the episode; they faced embarrassingly lengthy cross-examination without any setback. Red- handed arrest at the spot foreclosed all avenues to entertain any hypothesis other than assassin's guilt.

Naqeebullah, however , attempted hard to wriggle out of the charge by taking plea of having extended assistance to the deceased in his gasping moments; according to him, he not only laid information with the police but also shifted the deceased to the hospital in a bid to save his life; he pleaded ignorance about the disappearance of weapon, held by the co-accused. Both the accused appeared as witnesses in disproof of the charge, an attempt that failed to disturb preponderance of prosecution.

3. Appraisal of evidence by the Courts below , upon our own independent analysis, has been found by us inconsonance with the principles of safe administration of criminal justice. It is a broad daylight affair wherein Ghulam Abbas was apprehended at the spot; he was employed by Naqeebullah as a guard, who had obviously provided him the weapon that he used most unwisely , without provocation upon a hapless worker , earning livelihood for his family; he has already been dealt with leniency . Criminal Petition No. 9-Q of 2021 fails. Leave declined.

Assistance provided to the deceased in his injured condition by Naqeebullah petitioner does not absolve him from his responsibility to assist the law, however , at the most can be viewed as a mitigation to settle quantum of the sentence which having regard to the totality of circumstances is reduced from 5-years' to 3-years' R.I, pre-trial, period inclusive. Fine imposed by the Courts below in the sum of Rs.50,000/- is converted into compensation, to be paid to the legal heirs of the deceased; default shall follow simple imprisonment for six months. With the above modification, Criminal Petition No. 12 of 2021 is converted into appeal and partly allowed in the above terms.

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