Death penalty converted into life imprisonment.
 |
| Death penalty converted into life imprisonment. |
لاہور ہائی کورٹ نے عمران اللہ کی سزائے موت کو عمر قید میں تبدیل کرنے کا فیصلہ مختلف وجوہات کی بنیاد پر کیا:
1. **شواہد کی کمی**: عدالت نے دیکھا کہ قتل کے دوران صرف ایک ہی گولی چلائی گئی اور مجرمانہ اسلحہ کی برآمدگی کا کوئی ٹھوس ثبوت نہیں تھا، جس سے سزائے موت کا جواز کمزور ہو گیا۔
2. **مجرمانہ کارروائی کی نوعیت**: عدالت نے غور کیا کہ صرف ایک فائرنگ کی گئی تھی، جسے سزائے موت کے بجائے عمر قید میں تبدیل کرنے کا فیصلہ کیا گیا، کیونکہ سزائے موت عموماً انتہائی سنگین معاملات میں دی جاتی ہے۔
3. **معاملے کی تفصیلات**: عدالت نے کیس کی تمام تفصیلات اور ثبوت کا بغور جائزہ لیا اور پایا کہ اس میں سزا کی نوعیت میں تبدیلی کی ضرورت ہے۔
4. **مجرم کی حیثیت اور سزا کی نوعیت**: عدالت نے مختلف حالات اور شواہد کے پیش نظر، سزائے موت کو عمر قید میں تبدیل کر دیا، جبکہ معاوضہ اور دیگر سزائیں برقرار رکھی گئیں۔
یہ فیصلے عدالت نے انصاف کے تقاضوں اور موجودہ شواہد کی بنیاد پر کیے تاکہ سزا کی نوعیت کو مجرمانہ کارروائی کی سنگینی کے مطابق بنایا جا سکے۔
لاہور ہائی کورٹ، راولپنڈی بنچ نے عمران اللہ کے کیس کا جائزہ لیا، جس میں ملزم کی سزائے موت اور دیگر دفعات پر اپیل کی گئی تھی۔
فیصلے کے اہم نکات درج ذیل ہیں:
1. **شواہد اور سزا**: عدالت نے عمران اللہ کی سزا کو برقرار رکھا، مگر سزائے موت کو عمر قید میں تبدیل کر دیا۔ یہ فیصلہ اس بنیاد پر کیا گیا کہ ایک ہی گولی چلائی گئی تھی، اور مجرمانہ اسلحہ کی برآمدگی کا کوئی ٹھوس ثبوت نہیں ملا۔
2. **مجرمانہ سزا**: عمر قید کی سزا کے ساتھ، ملزم کو مقتول کے قانونی وارثین کو معاوضہ ادا کرنے کی سزا بھی برقرار رکھی گئی ہے۔
3. **سزا کی ترمیم**: اپیل کے فیصلے میں، سزائے موت کو عمر قید میں تبدیل کر دیا گیا اور دیگر سزائیں بھی برقرار رکھی گئیں۔ تمام سزائیں بیک وقت چلیں گی اور ملزم کو دفعہ 382-B کی رعایت حاصل ہوگی، جو قید کی مدت کو کم کرنے کی اجازت دیتی ہے۔
4. **حتمی فیصلہ**: اپیل مسترد کر دی گئی اور سزائے موت کی تصدیق نہیں کی گئی۔ عمران اللہ کو اب عمر قید کی سزا دی جائے گی۔
یہ فیصلہ عدالت نے شواہد اور کیس کی تمام تفصیلات کا بغور جائزہ لے کر کیا۔
MENT SHEET
IN THE LAHORE HIGH COURT,
RAWALPINDI BENCH RAWALPINDI
JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
Murder Reference No.130 of 2021
The State Versus
Imtiaz Ullah
Criminal Appeal No.60592 of 2021
Imtiaz Ullah
Versus
The State
Date of hearing:
11.03.2024
Appellant by:
M/s. Samina Jadoon &
Sardar Gul Nawaz Khaliq,
Advocates.
State/complainant
by:
Mr. Naveed Ahmed
Warraich, DDPP with Sher
Ahmed, ASI.
SADAQAT ALI KHAN, J. Appellant (Imtiaz Ullah)
has been tried by the trial Court in case FIR No.377 dated
28.05.2016 in offences under Sections 302/324/34 PPC
Police Station City, District Mianwali, and was convicted
and sentenced vide judgement dated 30.07.2021 as
under:-
Imtiaz Ullah (appellant)
U/S 302(b)
PPC
Sentenced to DEATH as Ta’zir for
committing Qatl-i-Amd of Khurram
Awais (deceased) with compensation of
Rs.500,000/- payable to legal heirs of
deceased u/s 544-A Cr.P.C. and in
default whereof to further undergo
simple imprisonment for 6-months.
U/S 324 PPC
Sentenced to
5-years
Rigorous
Imprisonment for attempting to
commit Qatl-i-Amd of Imtiaz Hussain
(complainant/injured PW) with fine of
Rs.20,000/- and in default whereof to
further undergo simple imprisonment
for 2-months.
U/S 337-F(i)
PPC
To pay Daman of Rs.10,000/- for each
injury payable to complainant/injured
PW and in default whereof to remain
in jail till the recovery of Daman i.e.
Rs.20,000/-.
Murder Reference. No.130 of 2021 &
Criminal Appeal No.60592 of 2021
2.
Appellant has filed this Criminal Appeal against his
convictions and the trial Court has sent Murder Reference
for confirmation of his death sentence or otherwise, which
are being decided through this single judgment.
3.
Heard. Record perused.
4.
Khurram Awais was done to death whereas his father
Imtiaz HussainPW-10/complainant sustained injuries during the
occurrence took place in the street on 28.05.2016 at 09:40
p.m. whereafter FIR was lodged on the same night at
11:10 p.m. on the statement of Imtiaz HussainPW-10, who
and his son Kaflain Mehmood ShahPW-11 while claiming
themselves to be the eye-witnesses of the occurrence
stated in their statements before the trial Court that on
28.05.2016 at 09:15 p.m. they alongwith deceased (Khurram
Awais) after closing their hotel proceeded to their house on
foot via Wandhi Ghund Wali, when reached near Morh
Masjid Syedan Wali at about 09:40 p.m., Imtiaz Ullah
(appellant) armed with pistol .30-bore alongwith with an
unknown accused came there on motorcycle and raised
lalkara to teach them a lesson for refusal of compromise
relating to the family dispute and made fireshot causing
injuries on index and middle fingers of right hand of the
complainant (Imtiaz HussainPW-10
), second fireshot made by
him hit on left thigh of Khurram Awais (deceased) as a result
of which he fell down, they (Imtiaz Hussaininjured/PW-10 and Khurram
Awais, deceased/the then injured) were shifted to DHQ Hospital,
Mianwali for treatment, fromwhere Khurram Awais
(deceased, the then injured) was referred to PIMS Islamabad
where he succumbed to the injuries on 29.05.2016 at
04:00 a.m.
Murder Reference. No.130 of 2021 &
Criminal Appeal No.60592 of 2021
5.
Appellant is Damaad (son-in-law) of the complainant,
having this close relationship there is no question of his
misidentity despite the fact that occurrence took place at
night as complainant cannot take risk to falsely involve his
“داامد” in the murder case of his son to ruin the matrimonial life
of his daughter, especially when in the same occurrence he
(complainant) himself sustained firearm injuries, leaving actual
culprit scot free. In these circumstances, in such like cases,
substitution of an accused is a rare phenomenon.
6.
Both these eye-witnesses (Imtiaz HussainPW-10 and Kaflain
Mehmood ShahPW-11
) were cross-examined at length but their
evidence could not be shaken during the process of crossexamination. They have corroborated each other on all
material aspects of the case. They have also established
their presence at the time of occurrence at the place of
occurrence with their stated reasons. Their evidence is
straightforward, trustworthy and confidence inspiring.
7.
The discrepancies in the statements of the PWs
pointed out by learned counsel for the appellant, are
minors and general in nature, occur in every case when
witnesses (who are human-beings) are cross-examined after a
long time of the occurrence as in present case, are not
fatal to the prosecution case.
8.
Dr. Saad AbdullahPW-14 during medical examination
observed firearm entry wound on left thigh of Khurram
Awais (deceased, the then injured) and firearm grazing wounds
on the fingers of right hand of Imtiaz
Hussain/injured/complainantPW-10
attributed to the
appellant. On death of Khurram Awais (deceased), Dr.
Muhammad Abdul MaalikPW-9 during post-mortem
examination also observed firearm injuries on his (Khurram
Awais/deceased) dead body which were ante-mortem in
Murder Reference. No.130 of 2021 &
Criminal Appeal No.60592 of 2021
nature and were sufficient to cause death in ordinary
course of nature, therefore, the medical evidence has fully
supported the ocular account discussed above.
9.
Motive of occurrence was that daughter (Mehwish) of
the complainant being wife of the appellant was not ready
to reside with him (appellant) as he was the man of bad
character but she has not been produced in support of
this motive which is not believable.
10. Recovery of pistol .30-bore on pointing out of the
appellant in presence of negative report of Punjab Forensic
Science Agency qua matching of the crime empties is
inconsequential but does not fatal to the prosecution case.
(2021 SCMR 104) “Akbar Ali and others Vs. The State and
others”.
11. Appellant has denied his involvement in this case in
his statement recorded u/s 342 Cr.P.C. and stated that he
is innocent and has falsely been involved in this case. He
has neither opted to appear as witness u/s 340 (2) Cr.P.C.
nor produced any defence evidence (except production of copies
of certain documents as Exh.DA to Exh.DF) in support of his defence
plea which has rightly been discarded by the trial Court
through the impugned judgment with sufficient reasons.
12. In view of above, if evidence of motive and recovery is
excluded from consideration, even then prosecution has
proved its case beyond shadow of doubt against the
appellant through the evidence discussed above.
13. Coming to the quantum of sentence, we have noted
some mitigating circumstances i.e. firstly, recovery of
pistol .30-bore on pointing out of the appellant in presence
of negative report of Punjab Forensic Science Agency qua
matching of the crime empties is inconsequential,
secondly, single fire shot has been attributed to the
appellant on the person of deceased, there is no allegation
Murder Reference. No.130 of 2021 &
Criminal Appeal No.60592 of 2021
of repetition and thirdly, motive has been disbelieved by
us with the reasons mentioned in para 9 of this judgment.
It is not determinable in this case as to what was the real
cause of occurrence and as to what had actually
happened immediately before the occurrence which
resulted into present unfortunate incident. (2014 SCMR
1227) “Zafar Iqbal and others Vs. The State”.
14. In these circumstances, while maintaining the
conviction of the appellant (Imtiaz Ullah) in offence under
Section 302(b) PPC, his sentence is altered from death to
imprisonment for life. The compensation and sentence in
default whereof awarded by the trial Court are
maintained. Convictions and sentences of the appellant
on other heads are also maintained. All the sentences of
the appellant shall run concurrently with benefit of
Section 382-B Cr.P.C.
15. Consequently, with the above said modification in
the impugned judgment, instant Criminal Appeal filed by
the appellant (Imtiaz Ullah) is hereby dismissed. Murder
Reference is answered in NEGATIVE and death
sentence of Imtiaz Ullah (appellant) is NOT CONFIRMED.
(ASJAD JAVAID GHURAL)
Judge
(SADAQAT ALI KHAN)
Judge
Approved for reporting.
JUDGE
JUDG
Comments
Post a Comment