MUNIR HUSSAIN and 3 others vs THE STATE
This matter arises from a petition for leave to appeal against the judgment of the Lahore High Court upholding the conviction of the petitioners under sections 302, 307, 148, and 149 of the Pakistan Penal Code 1860 for murder and causing injuries. The core legal question concerns whether the plea of self-defence is available in a sudden free fight where both sides sustained injuries and engaged in violence to test their strength. The Supreme Court held that in cases of a free fight where both parties desired to check their strength, the question of self-defence is irrelevant, and each individual must be punished according to their specific individual liability and role. The Court established that concurrent findings regarding individual liability and the classification of the incident as a free fight do not warrant interference. Consequently, the Supreme Court refused leave to appeal and dismissed the petition.
- Is the plea of self-defence relevant in a sudden free fight where both sides engage in violence?
- How is criminal liability determined for individual accused persons in a free fight case?
- Whether the Supreme Court will interfere with concurrent findings of lower courts regarding individual liability in a criminal trial?
- Section 302, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 307, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 148, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
- Section 149, Pakistan Penal Code 1860
1. ' MUHAMMAD NAWAZ ABBASI, J.---Leave to appeal is sought against the judgment dated 12-2-2002 delivered by a learned Single Judge of Lahore High Court (Rawalpindi Bench) whereby the appeal filed by the petitioners was dismissed.
2. ' The petitioners, alongwith 4 others, were tried on charges under sections 302, 307, 148 and 149, Pakistan Penal Code for causing death of Muhammad Noor and having caused injuries to Zaheer Ahmed, Nisar Ahmed, Muhammad Yaqoob, Bostan, Muhammad Shabbir and Muhammad Fazil.
3. With the assistance of the learned counsel, we have perused the record of the case and also gone through the F.I.R. The complainant side in this case received 40 injuries but the same have been explained in the F.I.R. It was stated by the complainant side that during the fight they had also caused injuries to the accused side. The occurrence had taken place on Eid day in the Village Traiti, District Rawalpindi, in a street. The conclusion arrived at by the Courts below that both sides desired to check their strength does not suffer from any infirmity. The record clearly shows that it was free fight and therefore, in such-like cases the question of self-defence is not at all relevant.
4. We subscribe to the findings arrived by the Courts below that each individual is to be punished according to individual liability and the role played by him.
5. ' In this view of the matter, we are of the view that the petitioners have been rightly punished in the case. In support of the plea of self-defence, the learned counsel has argued that one Azra, womenfolk of accused was injured in the occurrence but was not produced in Court and it is also on record that womenfolk from complainant side also sustained injuries.
6. We do not find any flaw in the judgment impugned and are not inclined to interfere with the same.
7. Leave to appeal is accordingly refused and petition dismissed.