SOHAIL AHMED Versus THE STATE

ORDER

SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.---The petitioner was convicted of offences under sections 302 and 307 read with section 34, Pakistan Penal Code, for causing the death of Aziz Ahmed, deceased, and making murderous assault upon his father, Manzoor Hussain (P.W..8), by the Additional Sessions Judge at Gujrat. In respect of the offence under section 302 the learned trial Court sentenced him to death, and in respect of the offence under section 307, he ordered him to undergo rigorous imprisonr Rent for a period of five years; it also asked him to pay fines in respect of the; said two offences. Alongwith him four other persons, namely, Muhammad Ashraf, Muhammad Arshad, Muhammad Younus and Muhammad Riaz were also tried but they were acquitted. On appeal and reference, the High Court upheld his conviction on both charges but reduced his sentence of death to imprisonment for life and instead enhanced the amount of fine. He now seeks leave to appeal from this Court.

2.The occurrence allegedly took On 7-5-1989, at 11-00 a.m., in village Bargianwala within the area of Police Station Dinga. It was stated by the prosecution that at the relevant time the deceased and his father Manzoor Hussain (P.W. 8) were going to the shop of one Mehdi Jatt when the petitioner and the co-accused alongwith one Muhammad Inayat (who later absconded and was thus not available at the trial) confronted them. Sohail Ahmed and Muhammad Inayat were armed with pistols while the others were carrying 7 MM rifles. On seeing the deceased and his father, Muhammad Younus, a co-accused, raised a Lalkara and immediately thereafter the petitioner and Muhammad Inayat fired at the deceased and Manzoor Hussain (P.W. 8), respectively. Both were hit and the deceased died on the way to the hospital. The occurrence was witnessed by Khalid Mehmood (P.W. 7) and Muhammad Yaqoob, brothers of the deceased. After the occurrence Khalid Mehmood (P.W. 7) went to the local police station. On the way he met Sub-Inspector Barkat Ali of Police Station, Dinga, in the Katchery Chowk at Gujrat. He made a statement before this officer at 3- 45 p.m. On the basis of the statement the first information report was recorded at Police Station, Dinga, at 5-00 p.m.

3.The motive for the occurrence was reported to be an incident which had taken place a month earlier. It was stated that there was a quarrel between the deceased, on the one hand, and Sohail Ahmed and Muhammad Younus, on the other, and that the deceased had given some slaps to them.

4.The petitioner pleaded not guilty at the trial. He alleged that Muhammad Inayat who was serving in the Army at the relevant time had fired at the complainant party in exercise of his right of private defence. He denied that he had played any part in the occurrence.

5.At the trial, the prosecution relied entirely upon the ocular testimony in support of its allegations against the petitioner and the co-accused. This

6.In support of this petition it is contended that the ocular evidence has been rejected by the Courts below in so far as four co-accused are concerned. Further, the statement of Manzoor Hussain (P.W. 8) with regard to the motive has also been disbelieved. Thus, the eye-witnesses have not been found reliable enough in certain important aspects. In the circumstances, the conviction, of the petitioner ought not to have been based on their testimony without independent corroboration. This was not available on the record. Consequently, the conviction of the petitioner suffers from a serious infirmity.

7.The contention raised in support of this petition needs examination. Leave to appeal is accordingly granted.