Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: KHALIL AHMED VS Respondent: THE STATE
Court Name: Supreme Court of Pakistan Judge(s): Muhammad Rafique Tarar, Saad Saood Jan Title: KHALIL AHMED vs THE STATE Case No.:Jail Petition for Leave to Criminal Appeal No, 280 of 1984 Appeal No, 98 of
1991 Date of Judgment:1994-06-30 Reported As: 1996 SCMR 1144 Result: Leave refused Judgment ORDER ' SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.---This is a petition through jail. The petitioner has been convicted of the offence under section 302, Pakistan Penal Code, for causing the death of Muhammad Riaz deceased and of the offence under section 324, Pakistan Penal Code, for using an injury to Muhammad Boota (P.W.8). 2. There are two eye-witnesses of the occurrence. One of them is Muhammad Biota (P.W.8) and the other is Nazir Ahmad (P.W.7), father of Muhammad Riaz, deceased. The parties are close neighbors and there is no history of enmity between them at all. There is, therefore, no reason why the statements of the eye-witnesses should not be believed even though they are closely related to the deceased. 3. The petitioner did not deny his participation in the occurrence at the trial. However, he claimed that the deceased was hurt with his own knife during a scuffle with him. It is difficult to accept his version with regard to the manner in which the deceased received the only injury on his body which proved to be fatal. The assertion of the petitioner that just before the occurrence the deceased had passed some objectionable remarks against his sister-in-law finds support from the record. It is, therefore, not possible to give him the benefit of the plea of grave and sudden provocation. He has already been given the benefit of the lesser sentence in so far as the offence under section 302, ibid, is concerned. In my opinion this is not a fit case where leave to appeal should be granted. ' I agree. (Sd.)