MUHAMMAD SIDDIQ vs The STATE
This matter involves a petition for leave to appeal against the conviction and sentence of the petitioner, Muhammad Siddiq, for the murder of Arshad Mahmood. The petitioner was convicted under Section 302 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 by the trial court, receiving a sentence of life imprisonment and a fine, a decision subsequently upheld by the High Court. The prosecution's case rested on eye-witness testimony, the recovery of a blood-stained weapon (Chhuri), medical evidence, and established motive regarding a financial dispute between the two students. The core legal question before the Supreme Court was whether the evidence warranted a reappraisal of the factual findings made by the lower courts. The Supreme Court held that the contentions raised by the petitioner's counsel merely amounted to a request for a reappraisal of evidence on questions of fact. Consequently, the Court declined to interfere with the concurrent findings of the lower courts, affirming that it is not a fit case for such an exercise, and dismissed the petition.
- Does a request for the reappraisal of evidence on questions of fact constitute sufficient grounds for the Supreme Court to interfere with concurrent findings of lower courts?
- Is the Supreme Court required to re-examine factual evidence in a criminal appeal where the lower courts have already established guilt based on eye-witness and medical evidence?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
ASLAM RIAZ HUSSAIN, J.--Muhammad Siddiq petitioner was tried for the murder of Arshad Mahmood. He was convicted under section 302, P.P.C. And sentenced to imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs.5,000. His appeal was dismissed by the High Court.
2. The motive of offence is stated to be that Muhammad Siddiq accused and Arshad Mahmood deceased were students of 10th Class in Salim Model High School, Lahore. The accused advanced some money to the deceased which was not repaid. The name of the accused was struck off from the roll of the school in May, 1974 but he occasionally visited the school. On 28-9-1974, the accused again came to the school where a fight took place between him and the deceased in the class- room. They were separated. Later on at about 10-30 p.m., when the deceased came out of the school he was attacked by the accused Muhammad Siddiq. The accused gave him three injuries with the Chhuri one of which landed on the thigh while the two on the buttock. The femoral artery having been cut underneath the injury on the thigh the deceased died in the Mayo Hospital, at 11- 22 a.m.
3. In support of its case the prosecution relied on the testimony of eye-witnesses namely (1)
Muhammad Saeed P.W. 1 and Murid Hussain H.C. P.W. 2; and Tipu Sultan P.W. 6; recovery of the blood-stained Chhuri P.1 from the accused; medical evidence and the evidence of motive.
The trial Court relied on this evidence and convicted and sentenced the accused as mentioned above.
4. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner in support of this petition at some length.
The contentions raised by him only amount to a request for reappraisal of evidence on questions of fact. In the facts and circumstances of this case we do not consider it a fit case for entering into this exercise.
The petition is consequently dismissed.