NOOR AHMAD vs SHAMIR And Other
The Supreme Court of Pakistan heard two connected petitions arising from a judgment of the Lahore High Court, Bahawalpur Bench. The High Court had maintained the conviction of the respondents under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860, but reduced their sentences from death to life imprisonment. The complainant filed Criminal Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 299 of 1981 seeking enhancement of sentence to the extreme penalty, arguing the murder was premeditated. Concurrently, the convicts filed Jail Petition No. 69/R of 1984 seeking acquittal, which was barred by 981 days without sufficient cause for condonation. The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's findings, noting the prosecution witnesses established the crime, while the reduction of death sentence to imprisonment for life was justified because the immediate cause remained shrouded in mystery and the motive involved vindication of family honour due to suspected illicit relations with the convicts' mother. Consequently, the Court dismissed the jail petition on grounds of limitation and merits, refusing to interfere with the High Court's judgment.
- Whether being landless tenants constitutes sufficient ground for condonation of a 981-day delay in filing a jail petition?
- Whether the vindication of family honour due to suspected illicit relations constitutes a valid mitigating circumstance for altering a sentence of death to life imprisonment under Section 302 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860?
- Can a death sentence be commuted to life imprisonment when the immediate cause of the murder remains shrouded in mystery?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
MIAN BURHANUDDIN KHAN, J.--Criminal Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No. 299 of 1981 is directed against the impugned judgment and order of the Lahore High Court, Bahawalpur Bench, dated 1-6-1981 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 121 of 1979/BWP and Murder Reference No. 1 of 1980/BWP whereby death sentence awarded to respondents Shamir and Janu by the learned trial Court, was altered to life imprisonment maintaining their conviction under section 302, P.P.C. Read with section Jail Petition No. 69/R of 1984 is filed by Shamir and Janu petitioners against the same impugned judgment of the Lahore High Court, praying for their acquittal. This petition is barred by time by 981 days, Application for condonation of delay is also on the record, disclosing no cogent reason to condone the delay, and the petitioners stated therein only that they are landless tenants and, therefore, they could not engage a counsel.
This order shall dispose of both the aforementioned Cr.P.L.A. No. 299 of 1981 and Jail Petition No. 69/R of 1984.
2. In Cr.P.L.A. 299 of 1981 it is contended that the impugned order is against the law and facts on the record inasmuch as that it is established that it was a clear cut pre-planned murder of the father of the complainant /petitioner by the respondents lying in an amubsh, and as such, they deserved no mercy and were liable for extreme penalty under section 302, P. P. C. Read with section 34, P. P.
C.; and that the learned High Court Judges gave no reason for reducing the sentence of Shamir and Janu respondents to life imprisonment against the weighty arguments of the learned trial Judge who awarded death sentence to the above named two respondents.
3.The prosecution case is that on 28-1-1979 at morning prayer time Hakam A.I awakened the complainant/P.W.7 Noor Ahmad, and himself proceeded to a nearby mound to answer the call of nature. After a shortwhile the complainant and his brother Bahadur Sher heard an alarm from the direction of the spot, they ran in that direction and saw Shamir giving Kulhari blows to Hakam A.I deceased. Ghulam Farid caught hold of him whereupon Janu gave Kulhari blows to the deceased, and thereafter they ran away. Motive for the crime stated to be is that the two respondents suspected the deceased Hakam A.I having illicit relations with their mother. Mst. Sharifan and there was also some dispute over the landed property.
5. Dr. Wahid A.I Bhatti who performed the post-mortem examination on the dead body of Hakam A.I found as many as nine incised injuries, caused by sharp-edged weapons, of which injuries Nos. 1 to 7 were grievous while injuries Nos. 8 and 9 were simple. In the opinion of the doctor, injuries Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 5 were individually sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature.
6. The learned High Court Judges, while considering the question of sentence observed that Shamir accused /respondent had admitted having caused the death of the .Deceased but he had raised the plea that he killed Hakam A.I deceased under grave and sudden provocation on seeing him sitting with his mother in the Kotha earlier on the day of occurrence. This plea did not find favour with the learned Judges and believing the ocular testimony of the witnesses, they maintained the conviction of the accused /respondents observing in paragraph 23 of the impugned judgment, as under:- "This brings us to the question of sentence. It is true that the immediate cause of death of Hakam A.I remained shrouded in mystery. There is no dispute that the appellants suspected that Hakam A.I deceased developed illicit relations with Mst. Sharifan their mother and Shamir appellant admitted that he murdered him in grave and sudden provocation. We, therefore, agree with the last contention of the learned counsel for the appellants that it was not a case of extreme penalty as it involved vindication of family honour and the sons of Mst. Sharifan could not forbear the disgrace brought by the deceased to their family."
Jail Petition No. 69/R of 1984 is barred by time by 981 days. On merits too, we find no reason to interfere with the impugned judgment. This petition is, therefore, dismissed.