DIN MUHAMMAD vs MUHAMMAD KHALID and another
This matter arises from a petition for leave to appeal filed by the complainant Din Muhammad seeking the enhancement of the sentence of Muhammad Khalid from imprisonment for life to death, following concurrent judgments of the trial court and the High Court which convicted Muhammad Khalid and Bashir Ahmed under section 302 read with section 34 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 for the murder of Abdul Aziz. The trial court had sentenced Bashir Ahmed to death and Muhammad Khalid to imprisonment for life, noting in mitigation that Khalid caused simple injuries on a non-vital part of the body, despite being vicariously liable. The High Court maintained the convictions and sentences, refusing enhancement. The core legal question concerned whether the discretion exercised by the trial court and the High Court in differentiating the sentences of the co-accused based on the nature of injuries warranted interference by the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court held that no justification existed to interfere with the discretion exercised by the lower courts in mitigating the sentence of Muhammad Khalid. The petition for leave to appeal against the refusal to enhance the sentence was accordingly dismissed.
- Whether the Supreme Court will interfere with the discretion exercised by lower courts in mitigating a sentence where an accused is vicariously liable but caused simple injuries on a non-vital part of the body?
- Can a complainant maintain a petition for the enhancement of a sentence from imprisonment for life to death based on the same evidence evaluated by the High Court?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 34, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
1. ' SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.---Muhammad Khalid and Bashir Ahmed were convicted by the Sessions Judge, Mianwali, of the offence under section 302, read with section 34, Pakistan Penal Code, for causing the death of Abdul Aziz, deceased. The trial Court sentenced Bashir Ahmed to death and Muhammad Khalid to imprisonment for life. The two convicts filed an appeal against their convictions and sentences. The learned Sessions Judge made a reference to the High Court for confirmation of the sentence of death awarded to Bashir Ahmed. The complainant party also filed a revision petition to seek enhancement of the sentence imposed upon Muhammad Khalid. The High Court dismissed the appeal of the two convicts and the revision petition filed by the complainant party and confirmed the sentence of death awarded to Bashir Ahmad. The two convicts sought leave to appeal from this Court. The leave has since been granted to them with the following observations:- "Leave to appeal is granted to examine whether the required independent corroboration was available to lend credibility to the interested evidence which has come on the record and which substantially forms the basis of the conviction and sentence of the petitioners."
2. (See Cr.P.S.LA. No, 269-L of 1993)
3. ' Through this petition Din Muhammad, who had lodged the first information report, also prays for leave to appeal to seek enhancement of the sentence awarded to Muhammad Khalid from imprisonment for life to death.
2. In not treating Bashir Ahmed and Muhammad Khalid on the same level in the matter of sentence the learned Sessions Judge observed as follows: "Khalid Khan accused caused simple injuries on a non-vital part of the body. Although he is vicariously liable for the act of killing, but his case calls for mitigation in the matter of sentence."
4. ' The High Court did not interfere with the discretion exercised by the trial Court in this regard. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner we see no justification to take a different view in the matter. Accordingly; leave is refused.