Summary: Summary pending

Summary: Summary pending

Summary: Summary pending

Summary: Summary pending

Summary: Summary pending

Summary: Summary pending

Summary: (a) Pakistan Penal Code (XLV of 1860)— ----S. 302(b)—Qatl-i-amd—Sentence—Conversion from death to life imprisonment—Scope— Trial Court convicted accused under S.302(b), PPC and sentenced him to death along with compensation under S.544-A, Cr.P.C.—High Court maintained conviction but converted death sentence into imprisonment for life on ground that prosecution failed to prove motive and recovery of weapon beyond doubt—Validity—Supreme Court held that ocular account supported by medical evidence proved guilt of accused beyond reasonable doubt and no contradiction affecting prosecution case was pointed out—However, where motive remained unproved and recovery of weapon was doubtful, such circumstances constituted mitigating factors—In cases where motive is not proved, normal rule is to award life imprisonment rather than capital punishment—High Court rightly exercised discretion in converting death sentence into life imprisonment—No interference warranted. Cited Cases: Bashir-ud-Din v. The State (2025 SCMR 1380) Muhammad Bilal v. The State (2025 SCMR 1580) Nawab Ali v. The State (2019 SCMR 2009) Mst. Nazia Anwar v. The State (2018 SCMR 911) Arshad Beg v. The State (2017 SCMR 1727) Allah Wasaya v. The State (2017 SCMR 1797) Mazhar Abbas v. The State (2017 SCMR 1884) Ghulam Muhammad v. The State (2017 SCMR 2048) (b) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)— ----S. 544-A—Compensation—Maintenance— Trial Court awarded compensation to legal heirs of deceased which was maintained by High Court—Supreme Court observed that conviction and compensation were based on reliable ocular and medical evidence—Such compensation order did not warrant interference where conviction itself was maintained. (c) Criminal jurisprudence— ----Benefit of doubt—Extent— Failure of prosecution to prove motive and safe recovery of weapon does not necessarily result in acquittal where ocular evidence is confidence-inspiring and corroborated by medical evidence—However, such deficiencies constitute mitigating circumstances relevant to quantum of sentence—In such circumstances, conversion of death sentence into life imprisonment is justified in accordance with settled principles. Disposition: Jail Petition No.6 of 2018 was dismissed; leave to appeal was refused; judgment of Lahore High Court converting death sentence into imprisonment for life was affirmed.

Summary: Summary pending

Summary: Summary pending

Summary: (a) Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, 1984— ----Art. 46—Dying declaration—Admissibility—Evidentiary value—Standard of scrutiny— Prosecution case for murder rested primarily upon dying declaration of deceased recorded soon after occurrence in hospital and ocular account of eyewitness—Held, dying declaration is admissible under Art.46, Qanun-e-Shahadat, without pre-condition of imminent expectation of death—Such statement carries great evidentiary value on principle that a person at brink of death is presumed not to lie, yet it must be subjected to close scrutiny as maker is not available for cross-examination—In present case, dying declaration was recorded within about thirty-five minutes of occurrence and was found consistent on material particulars with ocular account—Medical evidence established deceased was conscious, oriented and fit to make statement at relevant time—Non-attestation of dying declaration by medical officer, in circumstances where doctor had examined injured and found him fit, did not render declaration unreliable—Dying declaration and corroborating ocular/medical evidence were sufficient to prove charge beyond reasonable doubt. (b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)— ----S. 302(b)—Murder—Proof—Ocular account and medical corroboration— Accused was charged with murder by firearm; deceased sustained multiple firearm injuries and later succumbed—Held, prosecution evidence, comprising prompt dying declaration, corroborative eyewitness testimony, medical evidence of firearm injuries, and recovery of blood-stained earth and crime empty from place of occurrence, established commission of offence beyond shadow of doubt—No material contradiction or legal infirmity was shown to discredit prosecution version—Conviction under S.302(b) was upheld. (c) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)— ----Ss. 204 & 87—Abscondence—Evidentiary significance— Accused remained fugitive for about eight years after occurrence and was arrested much later; proceedings under Ss.204 and 87, Cr.PC were initiated and completed—Held, unexplained abscondence and disappearance immediately after occurrence, particularly when deceased was co-villager and accused could reasonably apprehend accusation, constituted strong incriminating circumstance pointing towards guilt, though conviction still rested on substantive prosecution evidence. (d) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)— ----S. 302—Sentence—Death penalty and life imprisonment—Mitigating circumstance—Motive not proved— Trial Court awarded death sentence; High Court maintained conviction but converted sentence to life imprisonment—Held, though death is normal penalty for murder, Court retains discretion to award life imprisonment where extenuating circumstances exist—Failure of prosecution to prove alleged motive constituted mitigating circumstance justifying conversion of death sentence into life imprisonment—High Court’s exercise of sentencing discretion warranted no interference. (e) Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898)— ----S. 544-A—Compensation—Maintenance— Accused was directed to pay compensation to legal heirs of deceased with default sentence—High Court maintained compensation and default sentence and extended benefit of S.382-B, Cr.PC—Held, no ground was made out to interfere with compensation and ancillary directions. Disposition: Criminal Petition for leave to appeal seeking restoration of death sentence (Crl.P.L.A. No.99-P/2019) was dismissed by majority (two to one, with Musarrat Hilali, J. dissenting); Jail Petition No.614/2019 filed by convicted accused was dismissed; leave to appeal was declined and judgment of High Court maintaining conviction under S.302(b) PPC while converting death sentence to life imprisonment (with compensation maintained and benefit of S.382-B, Cr.PC extended) was upheld.