ABDUL AZIZ vs THE STATE and others

ORDER

' FAZAL ILAHI KHAN, J.---The petitioner was convicted by Additional Sessions Judge, Gujranwala, under section 302, P.P.C. And sentenced to death and a fine of R&10,000 by order dated 14-12-199/ In appeal the High Court maintained his conviction but altered his sentence of death to life imprisonment and also allowed him the benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C. Leave to appeal is prayed for against the judgment of the High Court by the complainant in this petition.

2. Abdul Aziz (P.W.5) in his statement made to Muhammad Khan S.I. (P.W.8) Police Station Saddar, Gujranwala, then on patrol duty, on 16-11-1989 at about 8-00 p.m. Near Talwani Musa Khan disclosed that he alongwith his deceased son Muhammad Nazar and his brother Muhammad Rafiq and one Muhammad Sultan, son of Khushi Muhammad were present in their Baithak when Mehmood alias Mooda accused/respondent on entering the Baithak fired at Muhammad Nazar with his carbine. He was hit on his left shoulder and ribs and expired at the spot They identified the assailant in the light of electric bulb which was on at the relevant time They were threatened with dire consequences, when they wanted to apprehend him, and made good his escape. It was further stated that some 14/15 days prior to the occurrence accused had cut indecent jokes with his grand-daughter; namely, Mst. Rehana, whereupon the deceased had reprimanded and beaten him. The statement was reduced into a Murasala; It was read out to the complainant who after admitting it correct thumb impressed the same. The Murasala was sent to the police station where it was incorporated by Parvaiz Akhtar, ASI (P.W. 2) in F.I.R. Exh.PB.

3. On completion of the investigation the accused was put on trial. The learned trial Judge basing on the ocular evidence of the complainant and that of Sultan Ahmed (P.W.6) supported by medical evidence furnished by Dr. Naveed Aslam, M.O. DHO, (P.W.-3), who conducted the post-mortem examination, found the accused guilty of an offence under section 302, P.P.C. And on conviction sentenced him to death and a fine of Rs,10,000. The High Court partially accepted the convict's appeal, maintained his conviction but altered the sentence of death to life imprisonment. The benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C. Was also extended in his favour. Leave to appeal is sought for by the complainant against the judgment of the High Court.

' It was contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the Courts having relied on the ocular evidence and rejected the defence plea. The learned High Court was left with no material to alter the normal penalty of death imposed upon the respondent by the trial Court.

4. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the record. The learned High Court has observed in its judgment that material evidence to support the motive set up by the prosecution was not produced, therefore, the normal penalty of death was not justified. This Court is generally reluctant to interfere in the legal sentence passed by the trial, appellate or revisional Court unless some principle of law connected with the sentence is I B involved. No such question of law was pointed out, therefore, this petition is dismissed.