| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2001 SLG 2713 2001 SLD 2713 2001 PLD 469 |
Lahore High Court
Criminal Appeal No. 518 of 1996, heard on 30th May, 2001
RIAZ KAYANI AND BASHIR A. MUJAHID, JJ
Kh. Sultan Ahmed for Appellant. Sardar Muhammad Latif Khan Khosa for the Complainant. Sadaqat Mehmood Butt for the State
Criminal Appeal No. 518 of 1996, heard on 30th May, 2001
RIAZ KAYANI AND BASHIR A. MUJAHID, JJ
Kh. Sultan Ahmed for Appellant. Sardar Muhammad Latif Khan Khosa for the Complainant. Sadaqat Mehmood Butt for the State
GHULAM MURTAZA
VS
THE STATE
Law:
Section:
Penal Code (XLV of 1860)-------S. 302(b)---Appreciation of evidence---Conviction of accused had not been challenged---Deceased, a young boy of 16 years while coming from school resisted the evil designs of the accused for being sodomized and he straightway went to his father to complain about the behaviour of the accused---Instead of feeling ashamed for such a lecherous behaviour accused picked up a carbine and fired at the deceased killing him at the spot who died unsung in his adolescence---Accused, therefore, deserved no leniency--Application of S.308, P.P.C. was completely out of question as the accused had failed to prove his age to be below 18 years---No mitigating circumstance was available to compel the Court to award lesser penalty of imprisonment for life to the accused---Conviction and sentence of death of -accused were confirmed in circumstances. JUDGMENT RIAZ KAYANI, J.---Ghulam Murtaza son of Fateh Muhammad has called in question the validity of the judgment of the Additional Sessions Judge, Faisalabad dated 17-6-1996 whereby the appellant was convicted under section 302(b), P.P.C. for Qatl-e-Amd of Yasin deceased and sentenced to death. He was also fined in the sum of Rs. 50,000 under section 544-A, Cr.P.C. and half of it if recovered was to be paid to the legal heirs of the deceased according to Islamic share and in default of payment to undergo R.I. for 6 months. Death sentence was subject to confirmation by this Court. 2. Gulzar co-accused was acquitted for not having committed any overt act at the time of occurrence and a mere Lalkara was not sufficient to make him vicariously liable for the acts of the appellant. Similarly Ghulam Muhammad and Mahmoodul Hassan who were involved for instigating the murder of the deceased were acquitted as there was insufficient evidence to connect them with the abetment of the murder of the deceased. 3. Complainant Sultan Mahmood has filed an appeal against the acquittal of the accused. We intend to dispose of all these matters through this single judgment. 4. The occurrence which resulted in the unfortunate death of Yasin took place within the vicinity of Chak No. 191/R.B. at a. distance of 4 miles from the…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492