MUHAMMAD ZUMERRED Versus STATE

1. JAVID IQBAL, J.- -Before us there are two connected appeals, namely, Criminal Appeal No.143 of 1980 filed by Muhammad Zumerred and Mahmood Khan convicts/ appellants against their conviction and sentence, and Criminal Appeal No.144 of 1980 filed by Muhammad Arif complainant/appellant against acquittal of Muhammad Zumerred, Mahmood Khan and Mehrab Khan from charge under section 302/34 P.P.C. and their convictions and sentences under sections 304 Part II, 323, 324/34 P.P.C. Mr. Muhammad Bilal Advocate appearing on behalf of the appellants in Criminal Appeal No.143 of 1980 informs us that the appellants had already undergone their sentences and therefore he does not press Criminal Appeal No.143 of 1980. As a result Criminal Appeal No.143 of 1980 is hereby dismissed as not having been pressed.

2. So far as Criminal Appeal No.144 of 1980 is concerned it is contended by Raja Muhammad Anwar Advocate that leave to appeal was granted in this case to re-appraise the evidence for the reasons firstly that the blood was found on the roof of the complainant's appellant's house indicating that the fight had taken place there and that it were the respondents who had attacked the complainant party with their weapons; secondly that there was a sustained attack on the deceased and other members of the complainant party having regard to the injuries suffered by them, and thirdly that injuries sustained by the two ladies and Muhammad Zumerred respondent had been received while intervening to separate their womenfolk. It was thus contended that the High Court had wrongly held that the case of the respondents was covered by Exception 4 to section 300 P.P.C.

3. We have heard learned counsel at some length and also perused the record. The High Court after careful scrutiny of the evidence had formed the view that there was no previous background of enmity between the parties and the occurrence took place due to a sudden flare up. It was in this background that the High Court arrived at the conclusion that the case of the respondents was covered by Exception 4 to section 300 P.P.C. and the learned Judges setting aside the conviction and sentence under section 302 P.P.C. rightly proceeded to convict and sentence the respondents for acts of which each of them was liable. In our considered opinion, in the facts and circumstances of this case, such a view could justifiably be taken. Therefore the impugned judgment of the Lahore High Court calls for no interference. The result is that this appeal is also hereby dismissed.

4. S.Q./M-254/S Appeal dismissed.