Pakistan Case LawMst. BHAGAN Versus THE STATE and others
This matter originated from a petition for leave to appeal filed by Mst. Bhagan against the acquittal of a co-accused, Abdul Rahman, and the sentencing of the primary convict, Maqbool Ahmad, in a murder case. The trial court had convicted both individuals under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 for the murder of the petitioner's son, sentencing them to life imprisonment without providing reasons for withholding the death penalty. The High Court acquitted Abdul Rahman, finding his involvement doubtful, and upheld Maqbool Ahmad's conviction while also failing to justify the imposition of the lesser penalty. The Supreme Court refused leave to appeal regarding Abdul Rahman's acquittal, finding no grounds to interfere with the High Court's assessment of the evidence. However, the Court granted leave to appeal concerning Maqbool Ahmad to determine whether the normal penalty of death should have been awarded, given the trial and appellate courts' failure to provide reasons for opting for life imprisonment instead of the capital sentence.
- Is it mandatory for trial and appellate courts to provide reasons for awarding life imprisonment instead of the death penalty in a murder case?
- Does the Supreme Court interfere with an acquittal when the High Court has found the prosecution's case against a co-accused to be doubtful?
- Can the Supreme Court grant leave to appeal solely to examine the adequacy of a sentence imposed by lower courts?
ORDER
FAZAL KARIM, J.---According to the prosecution the incident occurred at about 11-30 p.m. On 15-3- 1992. The first information of the incident was laid by Mst. Bhagan petitioner. According to her she woke up on hearing a noise and found that Abdul Rahman respondent, empty-handed, was holding her son Irshad deceased by his legs and Maqbool Ahmad was inflicting hatchet injuries on various parts of the deceased's body.
2.The learned trial Court found both Maqbool Ahmad and Abdul Rahman guilty, convicted them under section 302 read with section 34, P.P.C. And sentenced each of them to life imprisonment and fine.
3.It appears that the learned trial Court gave no reason for awarding the lesser penalty.
4.The convicts appealed and Mst. Bhagan filed a revision petition. The learned Judge in the High Court found that the case against Abdul Rehman was not free from doubt and acquitted him. He maintained the conviction and sentence of Maqbool Ahmad. He too gave no reason why the normal penalty of death should have been as regards Maqbool Ahmad, be withheld.
5.In view of the role allegedly played by Abdul Rahman and for the reasons stated by the learned Judge in the High Court, we see no good ground for interfering with his acquittal. Leave to appeal so far as the acquittal of Abdul Rahman is concerned is refused.
6.As neither the learned trial Court nor the learned Judge in the High Court gave any-reason for not awarding the normal penalty of death to Maqbool Ahmad, leave is granted to consider whether or not it was a case in which the normal penalty of death should have been awarded.
Judges on this bench
- Manzoor Hussain Sial807 judgments
- Fazal Karim464 judgments
- Muhammad Munir Khan2,344 judgments