MUHAMMAD AMIN vs THE STATE
This matter arises from a petition for leave to appeal directed against the judgment of the Lahore High Court, which had confirmed the conviction and sentences imposed upon the petitioner by the Sessions Judge, Attock. The petitioner was charged, tried, and convicted under Section 302 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 on two counts of murder, resulting in death sentences, alongside convictions under Section 307 and Section 449 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 for related offenses. The core legal question involved whether there were sufficient extenuating circumstances to warrant a reduction of the sentence from death to life imprisonment. The Supreme Court held that upon considering the evidence, including the eye-witness account, medical evidence, recovery of the weapon of offence at the spot, and established motive, no extenuating circumstances existed to interfere with the concurrent findings and sentences of the lower courts. The petition for leave to appeal was accordingly dismissed.
- Whether the Supreme Court will interfere with concurrent findings of conviction and sentence where no extenuating circumstances are established?
- Does the recovery of the weapon of offence at the spot along with eye-witness and medical evidence sufficiently support a conviction for murder?
- Whether appellate courts can reduce a death sentence to life imprisonment in the absence of mitigating factors?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 307, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 449, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
' ALI HUSSAIN QAZILBASH, J.--This is a petition for leave to appeal against the judgment of a learned Division Bench of the Lahore High Court, Rawalpindi Bench, dated 8th March, 1988.
2. Muhammad Amin petitioner was charged and tried by the learned Sessions Judge, Attock, under section 302, P.P.C. On two counts for the murder of Mst. Parveen Akhtar and Abdul Ghafoor and sentenced to death on both the counts and a fine of Rs,5,000 on each count, in default to two years' R.I. On each count. He was also convicted under section 307, P.P.C. On two counts for causing injuries to Mst. Shah Jehan and Mst. Shameem Akhtar and sentenced to seven years' R.I. And a fine of Rs,3,000 on each count or in default to one year's R.I. On each count. He was also convicted under section 449, P.P.C. And sentenced to seven years' R.I. Or in default to six months' R.I. The High Court on appeal confirmed all the sentences.
3. The occurrence in this case took place on 4-10-1982 at 7 a.m. In the house of the complainant situate in Mohallah Sanblan, Fatehjang, the report of which was made soon after. The petitioner was arrested at the spot alongwith the weapon of offence. The prosecution has produced three witnesses whose eye-version account is supported by the medical evidence as well as the recovery of the weapon of offence. The motive too has been established.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has not questioned the conviction of the petitioner under section 302, P.P.C. But he has prayed for the reduction of his sentence. We have considered his argument in the light of the evidence produced by the prosecution and the judgments of the Courts below but we do not find any extenuating circumstance warranting interference in the sentence.
5. The petition is dismissed.