MUHAMMAD SHAH vs The STATE
This petition for special leave to appeal challenged the conviction of the petitioner, Muhammad Shah, under Section 302 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 for the murder of one Noora, as confirmed by the High Court of West Pakistan. The petitioner admitted to the killing but raised a plea of grave and sudden provocation, alleging he discovered the deceased in an illicit relationship with his sister-in-law. The core legal question was whether the petitioner's admission of the act, coupled with the ocular evidence provided by witnesses, justified the conviction and whether the plea of grave and sudden provocation was sufficient to mitigate the offense. The Supreme Court upheld the conviction, finding that the trial court and the High Court correctly rejected the plea of grave and sudden provocation. The Court maintained the sentence of transportation for life, noting that while the deceased's conduct regarding the petitioner's sister-in-law may have offended the petitioner's sense of honor, it did not legally excuse the murder. The petition was dismissed.
- Does an admission of killing under a plea of grave and sudden provocation automatically mitigate a conviction under Section 302 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860?
- Can a conviction be maintained when the accused admits to the act but claims provocation?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 342, Code of Criminal Procedure 1898
1. SAJJAD AHMAD, J.-In this petition for special leave to appeal, the petitioner Muhammad Shah has questioned his conviction under section 302, P. P. C. And his sentence of transportation for life there under for the murder of one, Noora, recorded by the Additional Sessions Judge, Lyallpur and confirmed by the High Court of West Pakistan, Lahore.
2. The motive for the murder was that the deceased Noora was suspected of having developed an illicit relationship with Mst., Mandan, were of the petitioner's brother.
3. According to the prosecution case, the petitioner, accom--panied by one, Zafar Abbas who was his co-accused but acquitted by the trial Judge, came to the oven of one, Shera, near the house of Gama Machhi and opened fire at Noora who was sitting there along with some persons, including his father P. W. Muhammad and his paternal aunt P. W. Mst. Fatima. Noora was killed on the spot and Mst. Fatima also sustained a fire-arm injury which was allegedly caused to her by Zafar Abbas mentioned above.
4. Muhammad and Fatima gave ocular evidence in the case which was supplemented by one, Manak, P. W. 11, allegedly another eye-witness who was disbelieved by the trial Judge. The petitioner in his statement under section 342, Cr. P. C. At the trial, admitted that he had killed the deceased and also caused a fire-arm injury to Mst. Fatima, but he pleaded that it was under grave and sudden provocation because he had seen his sister-in-law Mst. Mandan at the time with the deceased and the aforesaid Mst. Fatima.
5. On the evidence and circumstances of the case the plea of the petitioner was rightly rejected and his conviction under section 302, P. P. C. Was correctly maintained. He has been given a lesser sentence of transportation for life in view of the circumstance that the conduct of the deceased in carrying on with the petitioner's sister-in-law must have hurt his sense of honour.
6. The petition is dismissed.