Case Details

Citation(s)
1971 SLG 3217 1971 SLD 3217 = 1971 PCRLJ 1324
Lahore High Court
Criminal Appeal No. 199 of 1967, decided on 24th February 1971.
Presented By: Muhammad Afzal Cheema and Saleem Mazhar, JJ
Safdar Ali v. Crown P L D 1953 F C 93 ref. M. Arif, Tanveer Ahmad and Rao Muhammad Yousaf Khan for Appellant. A. R. Shahab Mufti, for A.-G. for the State.

MUGHALA-Appellant

VERSUS

THE STATE-Respondent

Law: Penal Code (XLV of 1860)

Section: 302

Penal Code (XLV of 1860) S. 302-Murder-Private defence, plea of-Accused admitting to have committed murder but pleading to have done so on grave and sudden provocation-Scope of discussion of evidence, held, reduced into a very narrow compass-Sole question to be determined: whether circumstance can be spelt out from evidence lending support to accused's plea-Accused apprehended at spot and produced before Investigating Officer soon after along with blood-stained crime weapon, plea of grave and sudden provocation raised for first time at trial and never urged during investigation or before committing Magistrate, accused's plea finding no support from medical evidence and negatived by prosecution witnesses Rejection of plea of grave and sudden provocation although not per se enough to justify conviction, yet evidence lent no support to accused's plea and prosecution case, held, based on evidence sufficient to bring home guilt to accused-Appeal dismissed. Date of hearing,: 24th February 1971. JUDGMENT MUHAMMAD AFZAL CHEEMA, J.-Mughala (27) a brother of Sadullon complainant, was tried for the murder of the wife of the latter, allegedly committed by him on the 19th of September 1966, at about 10 a. m. in the cotton field of Killa No. 22 of Square No. 39, towards the south-east of their dhari as shown in site-plan Exh. P. R. Having been found guilty under section 302, P. P. C. Mughala was awarded the lesser penalty of transportation for life by the learned Sessions Judge, Sahiwal, vide his judgment dated the 3rd of March 1967. He has now challenged his conviction and sentence in this appeal (Cr. A. 199 of 1967). The State has also filed a Criminal Revision (No. 1284 of 1967) for the enhancement of the sentence. This judgment will dispose of the Appeal as well as the revision. 2. The simple background of the case is that Mughala appellant and Sadullon complainant P. W. 2 had a third brother Agra, who was the first husband of the deceased Mst. Rajan. On the death of Agra, two years before the present occurrence, Mst. Rajan married Sadullon P. W. and started living with him along with her two minor daughters from Agra aforesaid. According to the prosecution,…
🔒
Continue readingLogin or create an account to access the complete content.Login / Register