Al Wakeelo
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Your Digital Lawyer, Always on Duty
Initializing Secure Chambers
Petitioner: ZAFAR HAYAT VS Respondent: THE STATE
Court Name: Supreme Court of Pakistan Judge(s): Abdul Shakurul Salam, Muhammad Afzal Lone Title: ZAFAR HAYAT vs THE STATE Case No.:Criminal Petitions Nos.447-L of 1991 and 9-L of 1992 Criminal Appeal No, 208
of 1989 and Murder Reference No, 83 of 1989 Date of Judgment:1993-02-13 Reported As: 1994 SCMR 47 Result: Leave granted Judgment ORDER ' MUHAMMAD RAFIQ TARAR, Hayat petitioner seeks leave to appeal from the judgment of a learned Division Bench of the Lahore High Court dated 21-8-1991 whereby his death sentence under section 302, P.P.C. Was altered to imprisonment for life and with this modification his appeal was dismissed. Sher Muhammad complainant has moved Criminal Petition No,9/L/92 seeking enhancement of the sentence of the convict. 2. The petitioner was tried on the allegation that on the night between 20/21-4-1987 at about 12/1- 00 (mid-night he committed the murder of Muhammad Naut, son of Sher Muhammad by firing at him in a street of Chak No,58/NB. 3. The F.I.R. Version was that on the fateful night Sher Muhammad complainant, his son Muhammad Naut, his (complainant's) brother Dost Muhammad and Ghulam Yaseen P.Ws. Returned from Khushab by a bus. From Bus Stand Dharayma they went to their Chak on foot. At about 12/1-00 (mid-night) they were passing through the street when Zafar Hayat armed with a gun suddenly confronted them and after raising a Lalkara that he would take revenge for the insult fired at Muhammad Naut who died at the spot. 4. At the trial the prosecution examined two eye-witnesses namely Sher Muhammad complainant and Ghulam Yaseen P.Ws. Dost Muhammad was given up as unnecessary. Prosecution also relied on the evidence relating to motive and recovery of gun from Zafar Hayat petitioner. 5. The petitioner pleaded not guilty to the charge and denied the prosecution allegation against him. He stated that he was falsely implicated due to political rivalry. The deceased had enmity with many other persons and was killed by someone during the dark hours of the night.
---
## Page 2
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that it was an unwitnessed occurrence having taken place during dark hours of night; the presence of the eye-witnesses is not established and the petitioner was falsely implicated on mere suspicion. He submits that inordinate delay in lodging up a story. After going through the evidence we feel that the submissions made by the learned counsel require examination. Leave to appeal is, therefore, granted to Zafar Hayat petitioner. Criminal Petition No, 9/L/1992 will be heard alongwith this matter.