Pakistan Case Law
1985 SCMR 557

MUHAMMAD SADIQ Versus STATE

⭐ Prefer in Google
Citation1985 SCMR 557
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Criminal Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 391 of 1980
Date1984-12-15
Judge(s)Aslam Riaz Hussain, Muhammad Afzal Zullah and Nasim Hasan Shah
Authored byAslam Riaz Hussain.
ResultOrder accordingly
AI Summary — generated from this judgment; read the full text below and verify before relying on it.

This petition for leave to appeal was filed by Muhammad Sadiq and Mian Khan against a judgment of the Lahore High Court, which upheld their convictions and sentences under Section 302/34 and Section 307/34 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 for the murder of one Mehdi and a murderous assault on a prosecution witness. The trial court had sentenced Mian Khan to death and Muhammad Sadiq to life imprisonment, along with fines. The Supreme Court reviewed the prosecution's case, which relied on ocular testimony from three witnesses, including the injured party. While the petitioners' counsel failed to challenge the merits of the conviction, the Supreme Court examined the sentencing aspect in light of the motive presented by the prosecution. Consequently, the Court dismissed the petition regarding Muhammad Sadiq, thereby maintaining his conviction and sentence. However, the Court granted leave to appeal specifically to consider whether the death sentence awarded to Mian Khan should be commuted to imprisonment for life, given the circumstances surrounding the motive for the crime.

Questions settled in this judgment
  • Can the Supreme Court grant leave to appeal solely for the purpose of reconsidering the quantum of sentence?
  • Is a conviction based on ocular testimony sustainable when the motive for the crime is established by the prosecution?
Laws & provisions referred
  • Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
  • Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
  • Section 307, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
criminal appealleave to appealsentence commutationdeath penaltyocular testimonymurdercommon intention

ORDER

ASLAM RIAZ HUSSAIN. J.‑ ‑This petition by Muhammad Sadiq and Mian Khan is directed against the judgment of the Lahore High Court dated 2‑6‑1980, maintaining their conviction and sentences under section 302/34, P.P.C. and 307/34, P.P.C. They were tried for the murder of Mehdi and making murderous assault on Khan P.W.8.

2. The learned trial Court convicted Mian Khan to death and Muhammad Sajid to imprisonment for life. They were also sentenced to Rs.1,000 each and under section 307/34, P.P.C. each of them was sentenced to 2 years R.I. and a fine of Rs.2,000 each. The fine if realized was ordered to be given to the heirs of the deceased as compensation. The High Court dismissed their appeal, and maintained their convictions and sentences. It confirmed the death sentence of Mian Khan.

3. The murder in this case took place at Peshiwela on 9‑8‑1971 in Village Chechian, Police Station Kharian, District Gujrat.

4. According to the prosecution the motive for the offence was that Jalal (acquitted accused) suspected that Mehdi (deceased) had illicit relations with his divorced daughter Mst. Manzoor Begum. The two petitioners and the two acquitted co‑accused are stated to have waylaid the deceased when he was going to fetch fodder from the field in Village Chechian in the company of Fateh Ali complainant (P.W.7), Khan (P.W.8), Muhammad Sadiq (P.W.13) and Niaz Ali (not produced)

Mian Khan petitioner is said to have fired a shot with his rifle hitting Mehdi (deceased) on the forehead as a result of which he fell down and died. His brother Muhammad Sadiq petitioner also fired at Khan (P.W.8), causing injuries to him.

5. The prosecution case rests entirely on the testimony of 3 eye‑witnesses out of whom Khan P.W.8 had sustained injuries during the incident.

The learned trial Court, therefore, believed the ocular testimony and convicted and sentenced the accused as mentioned earlier. The sentence of death of Mian Khan was confirmed by the High Court on appeal.

6. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners. He has not been able to put forward any contention to persuade us to consider the case on merits. However, in view of the motive put forward by the prosecution itself, this appears to be a fit case for considering whether Mian Khan petitioner deserves to be awarded lesser sentence of imprisonment for life.

Leave is, therefore, granted only for this purpose.

The petition is, however, dismissed with regard to Muhammad Sadiq petitioner.

M.I. ???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Order accordingly.

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