ABDUL RAHIM Versus RIAZ AHMAD
This petition for leave to appeal challenges a judgment of the Lahore High Court, which maintained the respondent's conviction for murder and murderous assault but commuted his death sentences to life imprisonment. The respondent had been convicted by the trial court for the murders of his father-in-law and brother-in-law, and for a murderous assault on his mother-in-law, following a dispute over his wife's refusal to return to the matrimonial home. The High Court reduced the sentence, citing the respondent's frustration over his failed attempts to reconcile with his wife as a mitigating circumstance, despite finding that the respondent did not suffer from legal insanity. The petitioner seeks the restoration of the death penalty, arguing that the respondent's annoyance over domestic issues does not constitute a valid mitigating factor for such grave offenses. The Supreme Court granted leave to appeal to determine whether the High Court's reasoning for altering the sentence was legally proper and consistent with established principles of criminal justice administration.
- Whether frustration arising from a domestic dispute constitutes a valid mitigating circumstance for the reduction of a death sentence in a murder case?
- Does the absence of legal insanity under Section 84 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 preclude a court from considering other factors in sentencing?
- Under what circumstances is it appropriate for an appellate court to alter a death sentence to life imprisonment in cases of double murder?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 307, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 84, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
1. JAVID IQBAL, J .‑‑This petition for leave to appeal is directed against the judgment of the Lahore High Court, Multan Bench whereby conviction as well as the sentence of the respondent Riaz Ahmad under section 307, P.P.C. have been maintained, whereas while maintaining his conviction under section 302, P.P.C. his sentence has been altered from death to life imprisonment plus fine. Briefly the background is that Riaz Ahmad respondent was tried for offences under section 302/307, P.P.C. and the trial Court convicted him under section 302, P.P.C. for the murders of Muhammad Yar and Muhammad Ibrahim his father‑in‑law and brother‑in‑law (Sala), and sentenced him to death on each count plus fine. He was further convicted under section 307, P.P.C. and sentenced to seven years' R.I. plus fine for murderous assault on Mst. Sarwar Mai his mother‑in -law. On appeal as stated above the death sentence on two counts has been altered to life imprisonment by the Lahore High Court, Multan Bench. The present petition is fox enhancement of sentence to death as awarded by the trial Court.
2. Respondent Riaz Ahmad had committed two murders and had made a murderous assault on his mother‑in‑law. The respondent was married to Mst. Rehm Ilahi daughter of Muhammad Yar deceased and Mst. Sarwar Mai injured P.W. She being unhappy with her husband had left him about two months prior to the occurrence and was residing in the house of her parents. The respondent on numerous occasions had tried to bring her back but the parents of the girl did not let her go with the respondent. 'This had annoyed the respondent who entering the house of the two deceased at midnight gave Kassi blows on the face of Muhammad Ibrahim deceased while he was asleep but when Muhammad Yar deceased and Mst. Sarwar Mai P.W. woke up and tried to apprehend him, he gave Kassi blows on the head and shoulder of Muhammad Yar deceased and also gave blows to Mst. Sarwar Mai P.W.
3. It was argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner that if the respondent had maltreated his wife and she had left him and was staying with her parents who did nor allow him to take her away, his annoyance on that account did not mean that he should go to the extent of murdering his father‑in‑law and brother‑in‑law and causing serious injuries to his mother‑in‑law. It was further argued that the Lahore High Court, Multan Bench had no justification in the circumstances of the case to alter the sentence from death on two counts to life imprisonment for the reason that he had been trying hard for the return of his wife and children but could not succeed due to persistent refusal of the two deceased. It was further submitted that again this could not be considered as a mitigating circumstance for the awarding of lesser penalty particularly when the finding of the learned judges was to the effect that the case of the respondent did not fall in the category of legal insanity within the meanings of section 84, P.P.C.
4. Leave is granted in this case to consider as to whether the reasons given for altering the sentence under section 302, P.P.C. in p para. 9 of the impugned judgment were proper and justified in accordance with the well‑established principles of safe administration of criminal justice.
5. M. I. /A‑200/S Leave granted.