Pakistan Case LawMUHAMMA.D RIAZ Versus THE STATE
This matter comes before the Supreme Court of Pakistan upon a petition for leave to appeal filed by Muhammad Riaz, challenging the judgment of the Lahore High Court. The petitioner was originally convicted under Section 302 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 for the murder of Allah Rakha and sentenced to death. The High Court dismissed his appeal but commuted the death sentence to life imprisonment while granting the benefit of Section 382-B of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1898. The petitioner now seeks leave to appeal, contending that the two eyewitnesses mentioned in the First Information Report were declared hostile after testifying that they did not witness the occurrence. Furthermore, the petitioner argues that the presence of the complainant, the sister of the deceased, was unnatural due to her residence in a different village, and highlights an inordinate 12-hour delay in lodging the First Information Report without explanation. Additionally, the petitioner notes that the complainant has submitted an application stating she has pardoned the accused. The Supreme Court granted leave to consider these submissions regarding the evidentiary reliability and the legal implications of the pardon.
- Does the testimony of eyewitnesses who have been declared hostile provide a sufficient basis for a murder conviction?
- Can a conviction under Section 302 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 be sustained when the First Information Report is lodged with an unexplained 12-hour delay?
- What is the legal effect of a pardon submitted by the complainant in a murder case on the appellate proceedings?
ORDER
WALT MUHAMMAD KHAN, J.---Muhammad Riaz, petitioner herein, assails the judgment dated 26- 7-1993 passed by a learned Division Bench of the Lahore High Court, whereby his Criminal Appeal No, 128/91 filed by him against the order of the Additional Sessions Judge, Sialkot convicting him under section 302, P.P.C. For the murder of Allah Rakha deceased and sentencing him to death and fine of Rs,15,000 or in default three years R.I. Out of which, on recovery, Rs,10,000 were to be paid as compensation to the legal heirs of the deceased, was dismissed with the modification that the sentence of death was commuted to life imprisonment and the benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C. Extended to the petitioner and the entire fine ordered to be paid to the legal heirs of the deceased as compensation.
We have heard Malik Abdul Wahid, Advocate, for the petitioner, and have perused the record of the case.
The learned counsel for the petitioner strenuously argued that Jamal Din P.W. 4 and Muhammad Ishaq P.W. 5 who were mentioned as eyewitnesses in the F.I.R. Did not support the prosecution version and deposed on oath that they had not seen the occurrence and that when they reached the spot, they found Allah Rakha lying dead. Both the witnesses have been declared hostile. Mst. Sharifan Bibi is the sister of the deceased but her presence, according to the submission of the learned counsel, at the spot is not natural as she is residing in a different village than that of the deceased. He further submitted that there is inordinate delay in the lodging of the F.I.R. Inasmuch as, the occurrence took place at Chahwela whereas the report was lodged at 10-15 p.m., i,e. After a delay of about 12 hours for which no plausible explanation has been tendered. Additionally, he submitted that the complainant, who is the sister of the deceased, had submitted an application to the learned Division Bench stating that she had pardoned the accused/petitioner.
Leave is granted to consider the submissions made by the learned counsel for the petitioner.
Judges on this bench
- Ajmal Mian2,984 judgments
- Wali Muhammad Khan585 judgments