' TASSADUQ HUSSAIN JILLANI, J.--- Petitioners seek leave to appeal against the judgment of the Lahore High Court, dated 13-4-2005 vide which petitioners' appeal was dismissed and sentence of death awarded to the petitioners (Shafaqat Ali on two counts and Saeed Ahmed on one count and on the other life imprisonment) was maintained.
2. The prosecution case in brief is that on the fateful day and time Shafaqat petitioner-convict armed with rifle, Shamshad Ali acquitted co-accused armed with pistol .30 bore and Saeed Ahmad armed with rifle attacked the complainant party in the manner alleged in the F.I.R. And caused the double murder of Muhammad Arshad and Muhammad Anwar. The learned trial Court vide its judgment, dated 13-10-2001 while acquitting Shamshad co-accused convicted both the petitioners under section 302, P.P.C. On two counts and sentenced them in terms indicated in para.1 above.
This has been upheld by the High Court with certain modification with regard to compensation.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that having acquitted, Shamshad co-accused who was ascribed similar role, it was not, open for the trial Court to convict the petitioners; that there is no independent witness of occurrence; that it was a night time occurrence where even the identity of the accused would be doubtful. Lastly submitted that on account of criminal antecedents of the two deceased, it was a fit case for reduction of sentence in terms of the law laid down by this Court in Mushtaq Ahmad v. The State PLD 2004 SC 150.
4. Having heard the petitioner's learned counsel, we are of the view that this is a case where F.I.R.
Was lodged within an hour and a half that by itself would rule out the possibility of pre-concert and the accused were specifically named and a definite role was assigned to each one of them. The said role insofar as it related to the petitioners stands A corroborated by the medical evidence.
There are three eye-witnesses of the occurrence namely P.W.11, P.W.12 and P.W.13. There is nothing on record to indicate that anyone of these witnesses had any direct enmity with any of the petitioners. In these circumstances, the concurrent findings of fact qua the guilt of the petitioners are unexceptionable and do not merit interference.
5. So far as the argument with regard to Shamshad Ali's acquittal is concerned, we have gone through para.22 of the trial Court's judgment which deals with this aspect. This accused was acquitted on the ground that during the investigation, he had taken up the plea of alibi which stood proved and the Investigating Officer declared him innocent. His acquittal was affirmed by the High Court and the appeal against his acquittal filed by the complainant was dismissed. Thus besides the initial presumption of innocence attached to an accused a double presumption of innocence was accorded by the two. Courts below. We have also considered petitioner's prayer for reduction of sentence. We have gone through the statement of P.W.15 the Investigating Officer who stated that both the deceased were involved in some old cases registered as for back as 1994. That being so, the deceased, could not be dubbed as persons having bad character.
6. For what has been discussed above, we do not find any merit into this petition which is dismissed and .