ABBAS Versus STATE

ORDER

SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.-- The petitioners who are real brothers were convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Sahiwal of an offence under section 302 read with section 34 of the Pakistan Penal Code for causing the death of one Hussain and were sentenced to death and to pay fine of Rs.5,000 each. On appeal and reference, the High Court maintained their conviction but reduced their sentences to imprisonment for life. The petitioners now seek leave to appeal from this Court.

2. According to the prosecution, Hussain deceased was resident of Chak No.79/EB where he owned some land. He shifted to Bhawan Shah sometimes prior to the occurrence. His son Rashid however, continued to cultivate his land in Chak No.79/EB. On 5-11-1982 he went to Chak No.79/EB to visit his son. At about 1 p.m., he left for Bhawan Shah. He was accompanied by his brother, Khan Muhammad PW.5, his son, Rashid PW.6, and his daughter, Mst. Sharifa. When he had covered a short distance, the petitioners emerged from a cotton field with hatchets. They set upon the deceased and inflicted hatchet blows on him. He died at the spot. The occurrence was reported at Police Station Arifuala on the same day at 2-30 p. m. by Khan Muhammad P.W.5.

3. Sometimes prior to the occurrence the deceased had divorced his wife on the suspicion that she was having an affair with one Noor Hassan who was the paternal-uncle of the petitioners and also father-in-law of one of them, namely, Abbas. The petitioners were stated to be annoyed with the deceased for casting aspersions on their paternal-uncle. This was described to be the motive for the occurrence.

4. The petitioners pleaded not guilty to the charge against them and denied that they were responsible for causing the death of the deceased. They stated that the deceased wanted to dispose of his land but his son Rashid P.W.6 who was in occupation thereof resisted his efforts in this regard. Later, Rashid and his relatives killed the deceased. The petitioners did not lead any evidence in their defence.

5. The case against the petitioners rested entirely upon the ocular testimony of Khan Muhammad PW.5 and Rashid PW.6. No doubt they were closely related to the deceased but that in itself was not a sufficient ground to reject their testimony. The High Court as well as the trial Court believed them and we see no justification for taking a different view in the matter. The defence version that it was Rashid PW.6 and his relatives who had got the deceased murdered remains entirely unsubstantiated on the record. It is true that the High Court did not believe the motive part of the prosecution version but that, as rightly held by the High Court, could not furnish a justification for rejecting the testimony of the eye-witnesses. After hearing the learned counsel, we are satisfied that the petitioners were rightly convicted of an offence under section 302, read with section 34 of the Pakistan Penal Code. They have already been given the lesser sentence. This is thus not a fit case for interference by this Court. Leave is accordingly refused.

M .I. /A-153/S Petition dismissed.