Pakistan Case Law
1988 SCMR 140

MANZOOR HUSSAIN Versus SAJID HUSSAIN SHAH

โญ Prefer in Google
Citation1988 SCMR 140
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Petition for Leave td Appeal No. 148 of 1987
Date1987-11-10
Judge(s)Aslam Riaz Hussain and Javid Iqbal
Authored byJavid Iqbal
ResultPetition dismissed

ORDER

1. JAVID IQBAL, J.- -This petition for leave to appeal has been filed by Nasrullah Khan petitioner who was convicted under section 302 PPC and sentenced to death plus fine by the trial court. His co-accused was an absconder. On appeal his conviction was maintained but sentence was altered to life imprisonment. The deceased in this case is Hanif.

2. The occurrence took place at morning time on 29 January 1981 with the area of Police Station Kamonki. There are two eye-witnesses of the occurrence namely Mohammad Arshad and Mohammad Shafiq. Human blood-stained hatchet had been recovered from the petitioner on his arrest about three months after the occurrence.

3. The motive for the crime is that 8/9 years prior to the present occurrence father of the petitioner was killed in a police encounter and the petitioner had suspected that the deceased gave information to the police. Thus he murdered the deceased in order to take revenge. The petitioner was armed with hatchet whereas his co-accused was armed with carbine when they attacked the deceased. According to the medical evidence the deceased had one firearm injury and one injury caused with sharp-edged weapon.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner attempted to argue that although the petitioner was arrested in connection with another case three months after the occurrence, there was no evidence on the record respecting his absconsion. It was also submitted that the human blood-stained hatchet was recovered at his instance three months after the occurrence, and therefore reliance should have not been placed on it. It was further submitted that the eye-witnesses were interested and should have not been relied upon.

5. We have considered the arguments of the learned counsel in the light of the record. He only seeks reappraisal of evidence and no law point has been raised. In that view of the matter we do no consider it a fit case for the grant of leave.

6. The petition is therefore, dismissed.

7. M.I. /N-35/5 Petition dismissed.

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