Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: LIAQAT ALI VS Respondent: StateHonorable Justice KHALIL-UR-REHMAN RAMDAYM. Zaman Bhatti,Ch. Munir Sadiq
2007 S C M R 214
2007 S C M R 214
[Supreme Court of Pakistan]
Present: Khalil-ur-Rehman Ramday and Tassaduq Hussain Jillani, JJ
LIAQAT ALI---Petitioner
Versus
THE STATE---Respondent
Jail Petition No.43 of 2005 decided on 15th May, 2006.
(On appeal from the judgment, dated 18-1-2005 of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, passed in Criminal Appeal No.95-J of 2000 and Murder Reference No.111 of 2000).
Penal Code (XLV of 1860)----
----S. 302(b)-Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art.185(3)---Reappraisal of evidence---No legal or factual infirmity in the concurrent findings of guilt against petitioner, was found---Both eye-witnesses though related to deceased, but they had no motive or reason to falsely implicate petitioner in the occurrence in question---Complainant, who was sister of deceased, and prosecution witness, who was widow of deceased, were natural witnesses of occurrence on account of the vicinity of the place of occurrence where the quarrel had taken place between the children which led to the occurrence---No exception could be taken to conviction of petitioner as recorded by the Trial Court and maintained by High Court---No leniency could be shown to petitioner with regard to punishment awarded to him as he had taken away lives of two persons in a callous and reckless manner on account of a petty quarrel between the children.
M. Zaman Bhatti, Advocate Supreme Court (absent) for Petitioner.
Ch. Munir Sadiq, Advocate Supreme Court for the State.
ORDER
KHALIL-UR-REHMAN RAMDAY, J.---Liaqat petitioner-convict was found guilty of committing the murder of Zulfiqar and of his nephew Ghulam Mustafa deceased. He was consequently convicted under section 302(b), P.P.C.. on two counts and was punished with death on each of the said counts. The ocular testimony had been offered by a sister of Zulfiqar deceased, namely, Mst. Sardaran Bibi (P.W.1) complainant and by the widow of Zulfiqar deceased, namely Mst. Abida Bibi (P.W.2). The said Abida Bibi P.W. even had an injury on her person though minor. There was no background of any enmity or ill-will between the parties and the occurrence took place on account of a quarrel between the two children of the two sides i.e. Shafqat who was a son and co-convict of present petitioner and Ghulam Murtaza who was a son of Zulfiqar deceased.
2. We have examined the record at some length, but could not find any infirmity legal or factual, in the concurrent findings of guilt recorded against Liaqat petitioner on the said two counts. Both the eye-witnesses though related with the deceased yet had no motive or reason to falsely implicate Liaqat convict in the occurrence in question. It is also not deniable that the said two females were the natural witnesses of the occurrence on account of the vicinity of the place of occurrence and on account of the quarrel which had taken place between the children and which had then led to the said occurrence.
3. Having thus examined all aspects of the matter, we find that no exception could be taken to the conviction of Liaqat petitioner as recorded by the learned trial Court and as maintained by the Honourable High Court.
4. The question of punishment then engaged our attention but the callous and reckless manner in which the convict had taken away the lives of two persons on account of a petty quarrel between the children, dissuaded us from showing any sympathy or leniency to the convict petitioner.
5. In this view of the matter, we find no merit in this petition which is accordingly dismissed. Leave refused.
H.B.T./L-4/SC???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Petition dismissed.