ASHIQ ALI and 4 others vs THE STATE
This matter concerns a petition for leave to appeal against a judgment of the Lahore High Court, which had dismissed the petitioners' criminal appeal and confirmed death sentences for certain accused individuals. The petitioners were originally tried and convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Gujranwala, under Sections 302, 307, 148, and 149 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 for murder and murderous assault. While the High Court acquitted one co-accused, it upheld the convictions and death sentences of the primary petitioners. The core legal question before the Supreme Court was whether the evidence against specific petitioners warranted a reappraisal to justify granting leave to appeal. Upon reviewing the evidence and the record, the Supreme Court held that the case against two specific petitioners required a re-examination of the evidence, thereby granting them leave to appeal. Conversely, the Court dismissed the petition regarding the remaining petitioners, as the case against them was deemed sufficiently proven. The principle established is that leave to appeal is granted when the evidence against specific accused persons requires a deeper reappraisal by the appellate court.
- Under what circumstances will the Supreme Court grant leave to appeal in a criminal case involving murder convictions?
- Does the Supreme Court have the authority to reappraise evidence in a criminal appeal?
- Can the Supreme Court selectively grant leave to appeal to some co-accused while dismissing it for others?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 307, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
1. ' S. USMAN ALI SHAH, J.---Leave to appeal has been sought by the peitioners against the judgment of the Lahore High Court dated 10-1-1989, whereby their Criminal Appeal No, 267 of 1985 was dismissed and the death sentence awarded to Ashiq Ali, Mukhtar Ahmad and Mahmud Ali was confirmed.
2. ' The petitioners alongwith Abdul Sattar, Waris Ali, Akhtar Ali and Abdul Ghaffar were tried by the Additional Sessions Judge Gujranwala under section 302/307/148/149, P.F'.C., for the murder of Muhammad Samar and Abdul Rauf both real brothers and for having murderous assault and inflicting injuries to Nabi Ahmad PW-15 and Sarnawaz PW-16, on 22-6-1982 at 6.30 p.m. In the fields of village Nangal Doona Singh, at a distance of 12 miles from Police Station Wandho District Gujranwala. The trial Judge acquitted Waris Ali, Akhtar Ali and Abdul Ghaffar of the charges and convicted all the petitioners alongwith Abdul Sattar under section 302/307/148/149, P.P.C. And sentenced them, vide order dated 27-4-1985, as under:- ' Under section 302/149. P.P.C.
3. ' For the murder of Muhammad Sarwar deceased, Ashiq All was sentenced to death and other five accused to life imprisonment. Fine of Rs, 5,000 was also imposed on each one of them. For the murder of Abdul Rauf deceased, Mukhtar Ahmad and Mahmud Ahmad were sentenced to death and the other four accused were sentenced to life imprisonment. Fine of Rs, 5,000 was also imposed on each of them.
4. ' Under section 307/149. P.P.C.
5. ' For the murderous assault on Nabi Ahmad and Sarnawaz all the petitioners alongwith Abdul Sattar were sentenced to five years, R.I. On two counts each with fine of Rs, 5,000 each one of them on each count.
6. ' Under section 148. P.P.C.
7. ' All the petitioners alongwith Abdul Sattar were sentenced to one year R.I.
8. ' The petitioners alongwith Abdul Sattar filed appeal before the Lahore High Court against their convictions and sentences and the complainant filed revision for the enhancement of the sentence of those from life imprisonment to that of death. The learned Judges of the Division Bench of the High Court, found the case against Abdul Sattar doubtful and acquitted him by giving him the benefit of doubt and dismissed the appeal of the petitioner& The death sentence awarded to Ashiq Ali, Mukhtar Ahmad' and Mahmud Ahmad was confirmed. However, the criminal revision for the enhancement of sentences of other petitioners was dismissed, vide impugned judgment.
9. Hence, this petition for leave.
10. We have heard the learned A.O.R. On behalf of the petitioners and have gone through evidence on record and judgment of the Courts below. In view of the judgment reported in 1988 SCMR 940, we have come to the conclusion that so far as the case of Mahmud Ahmad and Muhammad Iqbal petitioners Nos. 4 and 5 is corcerned, the evidence against them requires reappraisal and leave to appeal is, therefore, granted to them. However, the learned counsel has not pressed the case against Mukhtar Ahmad and Ashiq Ali and we are also of the opinion that the case against Abdul Majid being proved, needs no consideration. Hence, the petition with regard to Mukhtar Ali, Ashiq Ali and Abdul Majid is dismissed.