' IFTIKHAR MUHAMMAD CHAUDHRY, J.--- This petition has been filed for leave to appeal against the judgment, dated 23rd April, 2002 passed by the Lahore High Court in Criminal Appeal No,1210 of 2001 is Murder Reference No 47 of 2001.
2. Precisely stating facts of the case as have been disclosed in the F.I.R. No,217, dated 4th October, 2000 lodged by Taj Muhammad son of Rustam Ali are that on the night of incident he was present in the house and removed golden earrings of Mst. Jamila Bibi. On hearing hue and cry complainant along with other brothers including Sajjad Ahmad came out of the room and deceased Sajjad Ahmed overpowered the accused Javaid. Thereafter accused persons opened fire upon deceased Sajjad Ahmed. Accused Javaid was arrested at the spot and handed over to the police. On completion of investigation they were sent up along with others to face trial. As they did not plead guilty to the charge read over to them, therefore, prosecution led evidence to substantiate accusation against them. Learned trial Court after observing codal formalities vide judgment, dated 25th July, 2001 awarded following sentences to them:- Under section 148, P.P.C.Three years' R.I. each with payment of fine of Rs.10,000 each and in default whereof to undergo further R.I. for six months each.
Under section 457, P.P.C.Fourteen years' R.I. each with payment of fine of Rs.20,000 each and in default whereof to suffer further R.I. for one year each.
Under section 396, P.P.C.Javaid and Dilbar were sentenced to death.
Muhammad Nadeem, Muhammad Nasrullah and Younis Masih were sentenced to life imprisonment.
Under section 302(b), P.P.C.Javaid and Dilbar were sentenced to death for the murder of Sajjad deceased.
Nadeem, Nasrullah and Younis Masih were sentenced to life imprisonment each for causing injuries to the deceased.
Under section 337-L(ii), P.P.C.Except Dilbar all were sentenced to two years' R.I. each for causing injuries to Mushtaq. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. Benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C. was also extended to them.
3. Appeal filed by the convicts has been accepted by learned High Court vide impugned judgment whereby they along with Javaid have been acquitted of the charge, however, sentence of death awarded to the latter under section 302(b), P.P.C. Has been confirmed, as such instant petition for leave to appeal has been filed by the petitioner.
4. Learned counsel contended that petitioner fired at the deceased after snatching the pistol in his self-defence. In this behalf it is stated that incident has not taken place as narrated by the prosecution. According to petitioner's version he used to sell household articles from door to door in the village. The complainant party suspected his illicit relations with the wife of Taj Muhammad.
'Therefore, on the day of incident when the wife of Taj Muhammad was talking with him at the door of her house, deceased Sajjad duly armed with pistol and Mushtaq carrying a Danda came there and gave blows to the petitioner. In order to save his life, petitioner snatched pistol from deceased Sajjad and fired upon him. Learned counsel further explained that this plea had been introduced by the petitioner during cross-examination of P.W. Taj Muhammad and Mushtaq Ahmed as well as in his own statement under section 342, Cr.P.C, therefore, according to him petitioner has made out mitigating circumstances in his favour warranting lesser punishment instead of extreme penalty of death.
After hearing learned counsel for the petitioner and having gone through the available record, leave to appeal is granted in the circumstances of the case only to' the extent of quantum of sentence.