RASAB AND Another vs THE STATE AND Another
This matter concerns a petition for leave to appeal against the conviction and sentence of the petitioners, who were initially convicted of murder by the trial court but had their convictions altered to culpable homicide not amounting to murder by the High Court. The petitioners sought leave to appeal their conviction and sentence under section 304, Part I of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860. The Supreme Court noted that the petition was filed with a significant delay of 351 days; however, in light of the circumstances and the proposed order, the Court condoned the delay. Crucially, the Court observed that a separate petition filed by the complainant against the acquittal of the petitioners on the murder charge had already been granted leave by the Supreme Court. Consequently, the Court held that since the entire evidence would necessarily be reappraised in the context of the complainant's pending appeal against the acquittal, it was appropriate to grant leave to the petitioners as well to ensure a comprehensive review of the case.
- Can a petition for leave to appeal be entertained despite a significant delay in filing?
- Is it appropriate to grant leave to appeal when a related petition concerning the same evidence and acquittal is already pending before the Court?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 304, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
1. ORDBR ASLAM RIAZ HUSSAIN, Actg. C. J.-This petition is barred by 351 days.' WC have Bone through the application for condonation of delay and hoard the counsel. In view of the order we propose to pass regarding the grant of Leave in this case, we condone the delay in filing the petition.
2. The facts leading to the present petition are briefly that the two petitioners, were tried alongwith 15 others inter alia, for the murder of Habib, Abdullah and Babawal Haq. The learned trial Judge convicted the petitioner alongwith seven co-accused. The remaining eight accused, however, were acquitted. The petitioner and six of his co-accused were sentenced to death. Only Gbulam Rasul was sentenced to imprisonment for life.
3. The petitioners alongwith their seven convicted accused filed an appeal before the High Court. The seven co-accused were acquitted altogether, but the appeal of the two petitioners was accepted only to the extent that they were acquitted of the charge under section 302 and their conviction altered to one under section 304 1, P. P. C. And they were sentenced to imprisonment for life on three counts. They have now filed the present petition for leave to appeal against their conviction and sentence.
4. Gulam A.I, complainant, had earlier filed a petition against the acquittal of the petitioner and their seven co-accused by the High Court of the charge of murder and leave was granted to him by this Court on the 10th of February, 1980.
5. Considering that the entire evidence will have to be appraised in connection with the appeal filed against petitioner's acquittal, leave is also granted to the petitioners.