MANZOOR AHMAD MALIK, J.---Saif Ullah (appellant) has assailed the judgment of the Lahore High Court dated 16.01.2007 whereby Criminal Appeal No.350 of 2001 filed by the appellant against his conviction and sentence was dismissed by a learned Division Bench of the Lahore High Court maintaining the sentence of death awarded to the appellant by the Additional Sessions Judge Faisalabad in case FIR No.53/1998 dated 16.02.1998 offence under sections 302, 324, 34, P.P.C. registered at Police Station Thekriwala, District Faisalabad. The compensation amounting to Rs.25,000/- (rupees twenty five thousand only) ordered by the learned trial court and the sentence of simple imprisonment in default thereof was also maintained.
2. In this case, leave was granted on 25.02.2009 in the following terms:- "Inter alia, contends that the learned High Court proceeded to decide the petitioner's appeal, confirming the death sentence, without hearing petitioner's defence counsel and appointed defence counsel at State expense and he too was not given sufficient time to prepare the brief and on Court's order argued the case on the same day when the impugned judgment was passed.
2. Leave is granted to consider, inter alia, whether the learned High Court, while passing the impugned judgment in the manner as argued above, kept in view the principles for safe administration of justice laid down by this Court and also in High Court Rules."
3. At the very outset learned counsel for the appellant states that Saif Ullah (appellant) was convicted and sentenced by the learned trial court on 27.02.2001 and the impugned judgment of the learned High Court was passed on 16.01.2007 i.e. more than a decade ago, therefore, he would like to argue the case on its merits.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned Additional Prosecutor General for the State assisted by learned counsel for the complainant and perused the available record with their able assistance.
5. We are showing restraint to comment upon the practice adopted by the learned Division Bench of Lahore High Court which would be dilated upon in some appropriate case. Since this incident took place in the year 1998, therefore, we are deciding the case on merits, on the basis of available record. After perusal of the record, it has been observed by us that the appellant has been attributed firearm injuries on the person of Muhammad Arif (deceased). The ocular account is supported by the medical evidence, therefore, the appellant was rightly convicted by the learned courts below. However, it is not a case of capital punishment because there was no deep rooted enmity between the parties and motive behind the occurrence was that the appellant's side had purchased some landed property from Kashmiris and they had asked the brother of the complainant to arrange the amount of advance paid towards said transaction. According to the contents of the FIR the occurrence had started after hurling abuses from the appellant's side.
Recovery of 12 bore gun at the instance of the appellant which was taker into possession vide recovery memo (Exh.PN) is inconsequential as no report of Forensic Science Laboratory qua the said gun is available on record.
6. In view of the above, this appeal is partly allowed. Conviction of the appellant awarded to him by the learned trial court and upheld by the learned Division Bench of the Lahore High Court is maintained. However, his sentence of death is converted into imprisonment for life. The amount of compensation and the sentence of imprisonment in default thereof as ordered by the learned courts below is maintained with the modification that in case of default in the payment of compensation amount the appellant shall suffer six months' simple imprisonment. Benefit of section 382-B, Code of Criminal Procedure is extended to the appellant.