MUHAMMAD LATIF vs ZULFIQAR ALI and 2 others
This criminal appeal was filed for the enhancement of the sentence in a homicide case where the respondents stood convicted under Section 304, Part I, Pakistan Penal Code 1860, after receiving the benefit of Exception 1 to Section 300, Pakistan Penal Code 1860, for acting under grave and sudden provocation involving the molestation of their real sister by the deceased. The High Court had reduced their sentence from life imprisonment to that already undergone. Leave to appeal was granted to examine whether the period of actual sentence as convicts was commensurate with the facts and circumstances and established legal principles. The Supreme Court of Pakistan observed that when combining the period served as convicts and as undertrials, the total time exceeded six times the period undergone purely as convicts. By extending the benefit of Section 382-B, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898, the Court held that the sentence did not warrant further enhancement. Additionally, the Court declined to impose a heavy fine, finding no legal infirmity in the High Court's omission given the peculiar facts and circumstances. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed.
- Whether the sentence of imprisonment should be enhanced when the combined period served as convicts and undertrials is substantial?
- Can the benefit of Section 382-B of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898 be extended to justify a reduced sentence?
- Does the omission to impose a fine under the circumstances of grave and sudden provocation contravene sentencing principles?
- Section 300, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 304, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 382-B, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
1. ' MUHAMMAD AFZAL ZULLAH, CJ.---In this criminal appeal for enhancement of sentence in a homicide case the respondents stood convicted under section 304, Part I, P.P.C. Their act was found to be one under grave and sudden provocation and they were given the benefit of Exception 1 to section 300, P.P.C.
2. The sentence was reduced by the High Court from life imprisonment to that undergone. Leave to appeal was granted to examine; whether the priod of actual sentence as convicts, was commensurate with the facts and A circumstances of the case as well as in accordance with the principles laid down by the superior Courts in this behalf from time to time. On scrutiny it has been found that though the period undergone by the respondents as convicts is very short but the total period served by them as convicts and as undertrials when added together, it is agreed by the learned counsel for the appellant, comes to more than six times the period undergone as convicts.
3. In this line if the respondents were allowed benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C. The total period would not be against the dictates of justice. That being so, we by extending the benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C. Feel that the sentence of imprisonment should not be enhanced any further.
4. Learned counsel for the appellant also sought imposition of heavy fine. The grave and sudden provocation in this case relates to the molestation by the deceased of the real sister of the respondent. The High Court in its wisdom thought it proper not to impose any fine and if the reasons for this omission are assumed to be relatable to the peculiar facts and circumstances of C this case, it cannot be said that the omission to impose fine has contravened any principle relating to the award of sentence or even compensation. There is no force in this point either.
5. ' In the light of the foregoing discussion this appeal is dismissed.
Cited by 1 case
- MUHAMMAD HUSSAIN Versus ABDUL RASHEED 2015 PLD 23