' KHALIL-UR-REHMAN RAMDAY, J.--- On a Lalkara raised by Tauqeer accused, Ijaz convict was alleged to have fired pistol shots at Nisar deceased who then succumbed to the injuries thus, received by him. As a result of the trial held by the learned Sessions Judge at Jhelum, both of them were found guilty of the charge under section 302/34, P.P.C. And while Tauqeer accused was punished with a sentence of imprisonment for life, Ijaz convict was directed to suffer death on the said charge. On an appeal filed by them, Tauqeer accused was acquitted of the said charge by the learned High Court while the said appeal to the extent of Ijaz convict was dismissed and the said sentence of death awarded to him was confirmed.
2. Arif complainant, through Criminal Petition No,37 of 2003, questions the acquittal recorded by the learned High Court in favour of the said Tauqeer accused while Ijaz convict approaches this Court through Jail Petition No,151 of 2004 impugning the conviction and punishments recorded against him and praying for his acquittal of the said charge. Both these matters are being disposed of together through this single order.
3. The learned High Court had acquitted Tauqeer accused essentially on the ground that although the motive which had allegedly led to the murder in question stood directed against him yet he was burdened only with Lalkara while the injuries caused on the body of Nisar deceased stood attributed to Ijaz convict. Having heard the learned Advocate Supreme Court for the complainant- petitioner in the said Criminal Petition No,37 of 2003 and having examined the record, we find that no exception could be taken to the acquittal in question earned by Tauqeer accused.
4. Criminal Petition No,37 of 200 filed by Arif complainant is, therefore, dismissed. .
5. As has been mentioned above, whatever ill-will existed between the parties, the same involved Tauqeer accused on one side and Nisar deceased on the other. The complainant party including the two eyewitnesses had no reason to have spared the one against whom they had the real grouse i,e, Tauqeer accused and having falsely substituted him with an unconcerned Ijaz convict.
The two crime-empties available at the place of occurrence were found, by the Forensic Science Laboratory, to have been fired from the weapon recovered at the instance of Ijaz convict. A concurrent finding of guilt stands recorded against the said convict who was alleged to have shot the deceased dead in broad daylight in a busy Bazar because of which time and place, there was no question of the occurrence having gone un witnessed or the culprit having gone unidentified.
6. The learned Advocate Supreme Court for Ijaz convict made lengthy though misplaced submissions that Ijaz convict had not engaged any counsel either at the trial or even at the appellate stage; that the powers of attorney available on record were forged; that he had consequently gone unrepresented before both the said fora as a result whereof the proceedings before both the said learned Courts got vitiated. The power of attorney executed by Ijaz convict before both the learned Courts are available on record and it is also available on record that the said convict who was present before the trial Court throughout the trial had not taken any such plea or objection before the said Court or even at the appellate stage. Even through the petition filed before this Court, no such claim had been made. In the circumstances, we find no merit in the said contention raised by the learned Advocate Supreme Court on behalf of Ijaz convict.
8. (sic) Similar was the position with regard to an affidavit submitted by the convict in this Court who obviously could not be noticed by us as the plea being taken through the said affidavit had not been raised by the convict before the trial Court nor had he elected to enter the witness-box under section 340(2) of Cr.P.C.
9. Having thus, considered all aspects of the matter, we find that the conviction recorded against Ijaz convict was not open to any exception nor did the quantum of punishment imposed on him warrant any interference by this Court.
10. Consequently, Jail Petition No,151 of 2004 filed by Ijaz convict is also dismissed.