Pakistan Case LawRaja SONDHA KHAN Versus MUHAMMAD ASGHAR and another
This matter arises from a petition for leave to appeal filed against the order of the Lahore High Court suspending the sentence of imprisonment for life awarded to Muhammad Asghar, respondent, in a murder case. The core legal question before the Supreme Court was whether the High Court erred in exercising its discretion to suspend the respondent's sentence. The Supreme Court held that no interference was warranted with the discretionary order of the High Court, noting the trial court's observations that the role attributed to the respondent regarding injuries to prosecution witnesses was not established and that he was allegedly hit by stray pellets or simply present without a proven motive or direct role in the firing. The petition was accordingly dismissed, affirming the principle that appellate courts will generally not interfere with discretionary orders for the suspension of sentences unless compelling grounds are shown.
- Whether the Supreme Court will interfere with a discretionary order of the High Court suspending a criminal sentence without strong grounds?
- Does the mere presence of an accused at the scene of the crime, without established motive or overt acts of firing, warrant the denial of suspension of sentence?
MUHAMMAD RAFIQ TARAR, J---Raja Sondha Khan, petitioner seeks leave to appeal from the order of a learned Division Bench of the Lahore High Court dated 12-10-1993 whereby petition for suspension of sentence filed by Muhammad Asghar respondent/convict, under sentence of imprisonment for life in a murder case, was allowed.
2.The learned trial Judge while summing up his observations about the role played by Muhammad Asghar respondent No,1 herein in para. 25 of his judgment observed as under:--
"In so far as Muhammad Asghar accused is concerned, he is alleged to have caused injuries to Mushtaq Ahmad and Qutab Khan (P.Ws.) They have not been examined by the prosecution. Muhammad Anwar (P.W. 14) has stated that he had not seen Muhammad Asghar accused firing. Muhammad Azam P.W. 15 has also stated that he had seen the guns only with Muhammad Akhtar and Zafar alias Muzaffar Iqbal accused. Muhammad Asghar accused has no motive to attempt on the lives of Mushtaq Ahmad and Qutab Khan (P.Ws.). It appears that, some stray-pellets of the fire shot by Muhammad Akhtar accused had hit these two P.Ws. The role attributed to Muhammad Asghar accused does not, therefore, stand established. However, both Muhammad Anwar and Muhammad Azam (P.Ws.) have stated that Muhammad Asghar accused was also with Zafar alias (Muzaffar Iqbal and Muhammad Akhtar accused when they had alighted from the land-rover."
Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that Muhammad Anwar and Muhammad Azam P.Ws. Had fully implicated the petitioner and although Mushtaq and Qutab Khan P.Ws. Who allegedly suffered injuries at the hands of the petitioner were not examined yet their medico-legal reports were on the record, therefore, it was not at all a fit case for suspension of sentence.
3.After considering the submissions made by the learned counsel in the light of material available on the record particularly the observations of the trial Court reproduced above we do not feel inclined to interfere with the discretionary orders passed by the High Court suspending the sentence of respondent No,1. Consequently this petition is dismissed.
Cited by 1 case
- WASEEMUL HAQUE Versus STATE 1999 MLD 2382
Judges on this bench
- Muhammad Rafiq Tarar605 judgments
- Saiduzzaman Siddiqui789 judgments