MIAN BURHANUDDIN KHAN, J.--By this petition leave is sought to appeal against the judgment and order of the Lahore High Court, Multan Bench, dated 26-5-1986 passed in Criminal Appeal No.236 of 1982 and Murder Reference No.237 of 1982.
2. Hussaini, the accused/ petitioner and co-accused Ghulam, Varyam, Dad and Jalli were tried by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Multan for the triple murder of Hafiz Obaidullah, Mst. Zaitun and Mst. Bashiran. Hussaini the accused /petitioner was sentenced to death under sections 302/149 and 120-B (1), P.P.C. And fine of Rs.20,000; while the above-named four co-accused were sentenced to life imprisonment and fine of Rs.2,000 each under sections 302/149 and 120-B (1), P.P.C. And all the five were also convicted and sentenced to one year R.I each under section 148, P.P.C., and to 4 years each plus fine of Rs.1,000 each under section 364/120-B(1), P.P.C. Appeal of the accused/ petitioner Hussaini was heard by the learned High Court and the learned Judges found that he was rightly convicted and sentenced under section 302, P.P.C. And confirmed the death sentence awarded to him by the learned trial Court; while the learned Judges accepted the appeal of the above-named four co-accused and acquitted them of all the charges vide the impugned judgment dated 26-5-1986.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner challenged the prosecution evidence on the ground of partiality. According to him Allah Bakhsh P.W.7 hails from a place which is 55 miles away from the scene of occurrence and, therefore, presence of this witness on the spot is not believable in any circumstance; that his evidence has been disbelieved in respect of the acquitted accused although all the facts and circumstances of the case are against the acquitted accused, and.
Therefore, the learned Judges have wrongly placed reliance on the testimony of this witness as regards the accused/ petitioner Hussaini.
4. We have gone through the evidence on record and the impugned judgment and find that the accused/ petitioner Hussaini has been rightly convicted on the evidence produced by the prosecution. In fact the triple murder took place in his house. According to the F.I.R. Lodged by Jahana C.W.1., he alongwith Muhammad Sadiq C.W.2 and Sultan C.W.3 were proceeding towards Burewala at about 2 p.m.; when they passed near the house of Hussaini the accused /petitioner, they heard the cries for help and on entering the house they found Hussain: giving Kulhari blows to Hafiz Obaidullah; that in the meantime Mst. Zaitun and Mst. Bashiran sister-in-law and wife respectively of the accused /petitioner Hussaini came and asked him to desist from his attack on the deceased; that the accused/ petitioner attacked them too with Kulhari and caused their death; that thereafter the accused /petitioner took out a pistol and fired at Obaidullah; that the villagers collected at the spot and apprehended him and relieved him of the Kulhari and the pistol which they handed over to Ahmad Khan Lambardar. The motive for the crime is stated to be that Mst.
Zaitun deceased had illicit relations with Obaidullah, she had come to the house of the accused/ petitioner about two months prior to the occurrence whereas Obaidullah used to visit the house of the accused /petitioner in connection with his liaison with Mst. Zaitun and this was the cause of the triple murder.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that this being the admitted position that the accused /petitioner Hussaini, if found guilty, was entitled to lesser punishment as he was honour bound to stop Obaidullah deceased from visiting his house for immoral purpose. Considering this aspect of the case we grant leave on the question of sentence only. As the petitioner is barred by time by 21 days, we condone the delay: