GULZAR AHMED vs THE STATE
The petitioner sought leave to appeal against his conviction under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 for the murder of his father-in-law, committed in retaliation for the deceased successfully prosecuting a case for the dissolution of marriage of his daughter, who was married to the petitioner. The core legal question concerned the sufficiency and reliability of ocular testimony and corroborative evidence to sustain the murder conviction. The Supreme Court held that the testimony of natural witnesses, coupled with corroborating recovery evidence and identification facilitated by electric light and prior acquaintance, established the guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The petition for leave to appeal was accordingly dismissed, affirming the conviction and the lesser sentence already awarded.
- Whether the testimony of natural and related witnesses residing in the same house is sufficient to sustain a conviction under Section 302 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860?
- Does the recovery of incriminating material provide adequate corroboration for an eyewitness account in a murder trial?
- Whether leave to appeal should be granted when the conviction is supported by reliable identification and concurrent appraisal of evidence by lower forums?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
' SHAFIUR RAHMAN, J.--The petitioner stands convicted under section 302/34, P.P.C. For murdering his father-in-law Sultan by firing at him. This the convict did because Sultan had successfully prosecuted the case of dissolution of marriage of Mst.Koonja his own daughter who was married to the petitioner.
2. The inmates of the house, who were natural witnesses of the occurrence have appeared as witnesses. PW-2, Abdur Rahman, the brother and PW-4 Imdad aged 12 years, the son of the deceased, were sleeping in the Verandah where the deceased was fired at. Mst.Koonja PW-3, the daughter and Mst.Shakar Bibi PW, the widow of the deceased, were inside the Kotha. The barking of the dogs, the presence of electric light, the previous relationship and acquaintance made the identification of the convict possible. The recovery provides the corroboration.
3. The conviction rests on good evidence. The sentence is already the lesser one. The petition is liable to be dismissed.
' ALI HUSSAIN QAZILBASH, J.--I agree.
' ORDER OF THE BENCH Leave to appeal is refused.