Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: MUHAMMAD ASHIQ VS Respondent: MUHAMMAD ASHRAF
1988 S C M R 206
1988 S C M R 206
Present: Nasim Hasan Shah, S. A. Nusrat and Ali Hussain Qazilbash, JJ
MUHAMMAD ASHIQ--Petitioner
versus
MUHAMMAD ASHRAF and another--Respondents
Criminal Petition for Leave to Appeal No. 386 of 1982, decided on 17th November, 1987.
(From the judgment of the Lahore High Court, dated 13-10-1982 passed in Murder Reference 146 of 1980 and Criminal Appeal No. 1314 of 1979).
Penal Code (XLV of 1860)--
---S. 302--Constitution of Pakistan (1973), Art. 185(3)--Sentence, reduction of- -Conviction under S.302, P.P.C. --Reduction of sentence by High Court, challenged--Impugned order being based on sound reasoning, called for no interference--Leave to appeal refused.
Muhammad Ashfaq v. The State 1984 S C M R 1229 dis tinguished.
Raja Muhammad Muzaffar, Advocate Supreme Court Advocate -on-Record (absent) for Petitioner.
Nemo for Respondents.
Date of hearing: 17th November, 1987.
ORDER
S.A. NUSRAT. J.--The first respondent was tried by the Sessions Judge, Qasur under section 302, P.P.C. for the murder of Ali Muhammad, convicted and sentenced to death, subject to confirmation by the High Court and fine. On appeal brought before the High Court by the respondent, his conviction under section 302, P.P.C. and sentence of fine etc. were maintained, but the death sentence was altered to life imprisonment. This petition has been brought challenging the reduction of sentence passed by the learned High Court as per impugned judgment.
2. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner who assailed the findings of the learned High Court on the question of sentence relying upon a judgment of this Court reported as Muhammad Ashfaq v. The State 1984 S C M R 1229 which, however, we find, is quite distinguishable on facts. The order of reduction of sentence passed by the learned High Court is based on sound reasoning which calls for no interference. The petition does not merit any consideration and is dismissed accordingly.
M.I. /M-250/S Petition dismissed.