RAHM DIN Versus STATE

ORDER

1. USMAN ALI SHAH, J .‑‑This petition for special leave to appeal is directed against the judgment of the Lahore High Court dated 9‑4‑1984 whereby the appeal of Rahm Din petitioner herein against the judgment of the Sessions Judge dated 14‑1‑1981, by which he convicted him under section 302, P.P.C. and other offences and sentenced him to death, was dismissed. Alongwith the petitioner, Inam and his wife Mst. Umatal were also charged for the murder but they were acquitted by the learned Sessions Judge.

2. Briefly, the prosecution case is that the petitioner is the brother of acquitted accused Mst. Umatal. Four days prior to the occurrence, the children of Mst. Umatal gave beating to the children of deceased Murad Ali whose wife P.W. Mst. Zahida Parveen went to the house of Mst. Umatal, where the two ladies exchanged abuses. A day before the occurrence, deceased Murad Ali also went to the house of the acquitted accused. This time again there were abuses exchanged between Inam and Murad Ali deceased. Thereafter, the acquitted accused Inam and Mst. Umatal instigated Rahm Din petitioner to kill Murad Ali deceased.

3. On the day of occurrence in the morning time P.W. Mst. Zahida Parveen was performing ablution in her house to say morning prayer: Deceased Murad Ali was asleep. Meanwhile, the petitioner scaled over the wall of the house. The petitioner was armed with Gandasa and started blows to the deceased with it. P.W. Mst. Zahida Parveen raised alarm and tried to rescue her husband. But she was also injured by the petitioner. After accomplishing his design the petitioner left the house through the main door. He was seen by the P.Ws. Ramzan and Maqbool Ahmad. These two witnesses tried to catch hold of the petitioner but they did not succeed. Murad Ali deceased was taken to the hospital in injured condition where he succumbed to his injuries. The report of occurrence was lodged by P.W. Mst. Zahida Parveen. The post‑mortem examination conducted by P.W. Dr. Abdul Waheed on the dead body of the deceased revealed that death of the deceased was the result of incised injuries. The medical examination of P.W. Mst. Zahida Parveen also revealed that she bore incised injuries.

4. The petition is barred by 15 days. But we condone the delay in view of the fact that the petitioner could not afford to engage a counsel and filed the petition through jail.

5. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record. The occurrence took place in the house of P.W. Mst. Zahida Parveen. She was therefore natural witness of the occurrence. She charged the petitioner for the murder of her husband by giving him Gandasa blows and also charged him for her injuries. The medical evidence supports her. In the facts and circumstances, of the case, the guilt of the petitioner is proved beyond reasonable doubt and we do not see any reason to interfere with the impugned judgments the two Courts below.

6. The petition is accordingly dismissed and leave to appeal is refused.

7. M.I. /R‑56/S Petition dismissed.