KHAN MUHAMMAD And Others vs THE STATE And Other
This matter concerns two petitions for leave to appeal against a judgment of the Lahore High Court, which modified the convictions and sentences of seven individuals previously convicted by a Sessions Judge for murder and attempted murder. The High Court had acquitted the petitioners of charges under Sections 302/149 and 307/149 of the Pakistan Penal Code, substituting them with convictions under Sections 326/149, 325/149, 324/149, and 323/149, while maintaining convictions under Section 148. The core legal questions involve whether the evidence on record justified the original convictions and sentences, whether the High Court was legally justified in setting aside the convictions under Sections 302/149 and 307/149, and whether the High Court erred in awarding life imprisonment to a convict under Section 326/149 despite finding he did not inflict the fatal injury, and whether the sentences imposed on the other convicts were commensurate with their proven overt acts. The Supreme Court granted leave to appeal to consider these issues, noting the necessity of reviewing the evidentiary basis and the legality of the High Court's sentencing modifications.
- Whether the High Court was justified in setting aside convictions under Sections 302/149 and 307/149 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860?
- Can a sentence of life imprisonment be awarded under Section 326/149 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 if the convict did not inflict the fatal injury?
- Whether the sentences awarded to convicts by the High Court were commensurate with the overt acts attributed and proved against them?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 307, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 326, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 325, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 324, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 323, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
AJMAL MIAN, J.--By ,this common order, we intend to dispose of the above two petitions as leave to appeal is sought in both the above petitions from the judgment dated 15-12-1986 passed by a learned Single Judge of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, in Criminal Appeal No.702 of 1985 filed by seven convicted petitioners, namely, Gulzar and six others and private revision (Criminal Revision No.50 of 1986) filed by P.W.7 Zulfiqar Ali, the complainant and one of the injured eye-witnesses, whereby the High Court acquitted the aforesaid seven convicted accused under Sections 302/149 and 307/149, P.P.C. For murdering Muhammad Younas and injuring P.W.7 Zulfiqar Ali and P.W.8 Alamgir, and set aside the sentence of life imprisonment plus fine of Rs.5,000 each or in default two years' R.I. On count under Section 302/149, P.P.C. And substituted conviction under Section 326/149, P.P.C. And awarded life imprisonment to convict Khan Muhammad plus fine of Rs.5,000 or in default two years, R.I. Plus to pay compensation of Rs.5,000 or in default to suffer one year R.I., and to the remaining six convicts five years, R.I. And a fine of Rs.2,000 each or in default one year R.I. Plus to pay compensation ,of: Rs.1,000 each or to suffer R.I. For six months each and in place of convictions on two counts under Section 307/149, P.P.C. All the seven convicts were convicted under Section 325/149, P.P.C. And in place of seven years' R.I. Each and fine etc. Convict Khan Muhammad was awarded seven years' R.I. Under the above provisions on each of the two counts and a fine of Rs.4,000 on each count or in default to suffer two years' R.I. Plus to pay compensation of Rs.4,000 or in default one year' R.I., and the remaining six convicts were awarded three years' R.I. And a fine of Rs.1,000 or in default six months' R.I. On each of the above counts plus to pay compensation of Rs.1,000 each on each count or in default six months, R.I. All the above seven convicts were also convicted by the High Court under Sections 324/149 and 323/149, P.P.C., and were awarded sentences, fine and to pay the amounts of compensation mentioned in the impugned judgment. The High Court also maintained the conviction of all the above seven convicts under Section 148, P.P.C. Recorded by the Sessions Judge. However, the High Court dismissed the above Criminal Revision No.50 of 1986.
3. The complainant has filed the above Cr.P.L.A. No.392 of 1986, whereas the seven convicts have filed-the above Cr.P.L.A. No.22-R of 1987.
4. We have heard Mr.Asif Saeed Khan Khosa, learned A.S.C. Appearing for the complainant in support of his above petition, and Mr. Aftab Farrukh, learned Senior, Advocate Supreme Court appearing for the above seven convicts in support of their petition for leave, and we are of the view that the case is fit for grant of leave to consider inter alia the following questions:-
(i) whether on the basis of the evidence on record the convictions and sentences awarded by the learned Sessions Judge were justified in law;
(ii) whether the High Court was justified in setting aside the convictions and sentences of the seven convicts under Sections 302/149 and 307/149, P.P.C.; and
(iii) whether the High Court was justified to award life imprisonment to convict Khan Muhammad under Section 326/149, P.P.C. After having held that the above convict had not inflicted any injury to the deceased and whether the sentences awarded to other convicts commensurated with the overt acts attributed and proved against them.
Leave is accordingly granted.
5. In above Cr.P.LA. No.392 of 1986 bailable warrants in the sum of Rs.10,000 be issued against the private respondents to the satisfaction of the Sessions Judge, Sargodha.
The paper books should be prepared during the vacations or the requisite number of paper books of the High Court be obtained from the A.O.R. Concerned before the coming summer vacations are over and the appeals be fixed for regular hearing after the reopening of the Court.