AMAN ULLAH vs THE STATE
This matter concerns a petition for leave to appeal against the judgment of the Lahore High Court, which upheld the conviction and death sentence of the petitioner, Aman Ullah, for the murder of Syed Hussain Shah. The core legal question was whether the prosecution had sufficiently established the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt, particularly regarding the reliability of eye-witness testimony and the corroborative evidence presented. The Supreme Court dismissed the petition, holding that the prosecution successfully proved its case through natural and independent eye-witnesses whose presence at the shrine was logical and whose testimony remained unimpeached. The Court emphasized that the apprehension of the accused at the crime scene with the murder weapon, supported by forensic evidence matching the weapon to the crime empties, provided strong corroboration of the ocular account. Furthermore, the Court found no evidence of enmity or motive for false implication. The judgment reaffirms the principle that when ocular testimony is corroborated by recovery of the weapon of offence at the spot and forensic reports, the conviction is sound, especially in the absence of mitigating circumstances.
- Does the apprehension of an accused at the crime scene with the weapon of offence serve as sufficient corroboration of ocular testimony?
- Can the presence of disciples at a shrine during a murder be considered natural and reliable for eye-witness testimony?
- Is a conviction under Section 302 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 sustainable when forensic reports confirm the weapon recovered from the accused matches the crime empties?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
ORDER
KHALIL-UR-REHMAN RAMDAY, J.---One Aman Ullah was tried by a learned Additional Sessions Judge at Lahore for the murder of Syed Hussain Shah. Through his judgment dated 24-1-1996 the said learned Trial Judge convicted the said Aman Ullah under section 302, P.P.C. And punished him with death. Criminal Appeal No,59 of 1996 filed by the said convict in the Lahore High Court was dismissed and pursuant to Murder Reference No,23 of 1996 the above mentioned sentence of death awarded to Aman Ullah was confirmed.
2. The occurrence had taken place on 4-7-1992 at about 8-00 A.M. At the shrine of Khawaja Ghulam Murtaza Usman Ganj of which shrine the deceased was the Gaddi Nasheen. On the day of occurrence Syed Hussain Shah deceased was present in his room at the said shrine at about 8-00 A.M. Alongwith his son Ghulam Mustafa complainant P.W.1 and his other disciples including Ghulam Abbas P.W.3 and Akbar Ali P.W.8 when Aman Ullah petitioner emerged there with a mauser in his hand and fired indiscriminately at the said deceased which led to his death at the spot. Aman Ullah convict was apprehended at the spot by the P.Ws. And others alongwith the above mentioned mauser (Exh.P.1). After recording the F.I.R. Muhammad Azeem, S.-I. (P.W.15) reached the place of occurrence where Aman Ullah convict and the mauser (Exh. P.1) were handed over to him.
He also took into possession five crime empties (Exh. P.5/206) from the place of occurence and as per the report Exh. P.O of the Forensic Science Laboratory, the said crime empties had been found to have been tired from Exh. P.1 i.e actually a pistol of .30 bore.
3. Syed Hussain Shah deceased was a resident of District Sheikhupura who used to spend four days every week i.e from Thursday till Monday at the shrine in question. The possibility of his son being present with his father could not be said to be unnatural. Likewise the presence of Ghulam Abbas P.W.3 and Akbar Ali P.W.8 at the place of occurrence at the relevant time was also not open to any serious exception because the claim of these two eye-witnesses that they were the disciples of the deceased could not be dislodged. The mere fact that these disciples were not residents of the vicinity of the shrine in question did not make their presence at the place of occurrence open to any doubt because excepting the disciples to come to the shrine to visit the Gaddi Nasheen it is nothing unusual.
4. Nothing could be brought on record even to remotely indicate that the complainant or any other eye-witness had any reason to falsely implicate the petitioner and to maliciously substitute him for the actual offender. It was suggested that a brother of the petitioner was murdered in the year 1995 and one Yasin was convicted for the said murder and that this Yasin was a cousin of Ghulam Abbas P.W.3. This suggestion was denied by Ghulam Abbas P.W.3 and the defence thereafter did not pursue this claim any further and could not prove any relationship between the said Yasin and Ghulam Abbas P.Ws.
5. Aman Ullah accused was apprehended at the spot alongwith the weapon of offence which was a further and a rather strong circumstance corroborating the ocular testimony.
6. The eye-witnesses in the present case are thus natural and independent witnesses of the occurrence in question. Sh. Muhammad Amin (P.W. 5) and Muhammad Rashid (P.W.6) have successfully proved the motive. Report of the Forensic Science Laboratory also supports the prosecution case. The petitioner was apprehended at the spot alongwith the weapon of offence which matched the crime empties found at the spot. The petitioner was thus rightly convicted. No mitigating circumstances are available on record.
7. This petition is, therefore, dismissed and leave refused.
Cited by 4 cases
- Shahid Ali vs The State 2025 SCP 250
- SHAHID ALI Versus State 2026 PLD 126
- ZAHID IMRAN and others vs STATE 2006 PLJ SC 701
- ZAHID IMRAN and others vs THE STATE and others 2006 PLD Supreme Court 109