JAVID IQBAL, J.--Criminal Petition for Leave to Appeal Nos.226 of 1986 and 237 of 1986 alongwith Jail Petition for Leave to Appeal No.30-R of 1986 are connected as they are directed against the same judgment of the Lahore High Court Lahore and these are therefore, taken up together.
Criminal Petition No.237 of 1986 has been filed by Muhammad Iqbal against his conviction and sentence while he has also filed Jail Petition No. 30-R of 1986 against his conviction and sentence.
Criminal Petition No.226 of 1986 has been filed by Muhammad Irshad complainant against Muhammad Iqbal, Muhammad Malik and Gul Muhammad respondents. It is against complete acquittal of Gul Muhammad respondent as well as against acquittal of Muhammad Malik respondent of a charge under section 302, P.P.C. However, it is for enhancement of sentence of Muhammad Malik respondent under section 304, Part I. P . P. C . Whereas it is for enhancement of sentence of Muhammad Iqbal respondent from life imprisonment to death. Learned counsel does not press this petition against acquittal of Gul Muhammad respondent and, therefore, it is dismissed so far as Gul Muhammad respondent is concerned. Briefly the facts are that Muhammad Iqbal alongwith Muhammad Malik and Gul Muhammad was tried for offences under section 302/34, P.P.C. For the murder of Mushtaq by the Additional Sessions Judge, Sialkot who vide his judgment dated 16th July, 1984 completely acquitted Gul Muhammad and while acquitting Muhammad Malik for an offence under section 302, P.P.C. Convicted him under section 304, Part I, P.P.C. And sentenced him to the period of imprisonment already undergone (eight months) plus fine. Only Muhammad Iqbal was convicted under section 302, P.P.C. And sentenced to death plus fine. In appeal the Lahore High Court Lahore vide its judgment dated 24th Play, 1986 while maintaining the judgment of the trial Court altered the sentence of Muhammad Iqbal from death to life imprisonment.
2. The occurrence took place at 2-30 p.m. On 17th January, 1983 at Pakki Kotli Police Station Sadar Sialkot. The F.I.R. Was lodged by Muhammad Irshad complainant brother of the deceased on the same day shortly thereafter. Muhammad Malik and Muhammad Iqbal were arrested on 19th January, 1983. From both of them were recovered human blood-stained Chhuris. The recovery evidence had been relied upon by both the Courts below. The eye-witnesses of the occurrence are Muhammad Irshad complainant brother of the deceased, Shukar Din and Iftikhar Ahmad P.Ws., not related. According to the medical evidence the deceased had two incised wounds on his left chest and left abdomen whereas one incised wound on the left buttock. The first two injuries were grievous and sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature whereas the third injury was simple in nature. The deceased died nine days after the receipt of injuries. There is on record also a dying statement of the deceased but this has been rejected as its contents were considered identical to the F.I.R. The motive given is that a dispute arose between the parties on some election matter. Gul Muhammad had a serious altercation with the deceased threatening him that he would teach him a lesson for the insult. Thereafter, it is stated, that with the help of Muhammad Iqbal and Muhammad Malik he attacked the deceased. According to the prosecution version Gul Muhammad hatched a conspiracy and hired Muhammad Iqbal and Muhammad Malik to kill the deceased. On the fateful day the deceased was sitting at a shop. Gul Muhammad gave a Lalkara that he should be taught a lesson for insulting him and on his exhortation Muhammad Iqbal gave Chhuri blows to the deceased in the abdomen and chest whereas Muhammad Malik gave him a Chhuri blow on his left buttock. The deceased was removed to the hospital but he died after nine days.
3. It is contended by the learned counsel for Muhammad Irshad complainant (in Criminal Petition No.226 of 1986) that in the instant case the ocular testimony as well as the recovery evidence has been relied upon. It was submitted that the Lahore High Court Lahore in the impugned judgment arrived at the conclusion that the ocular testimony was being supported by the recovery evidence in this case and yet while maintaining the conviction and sentence of Muhammad Malik awarded by the trial Court and also while maintaining the conviction of Muhammad Iqbal under section 302, P.P.C. The learned Judges altered his sentence from death to imprisonment for life for the reason that the motive was shrouded in mystery and that the two of them inflicted one blow each on the deceased, therefore, capital punishment was uncalled for. It was submitted that the motive was being supported by the statement of Muhammad Iqbal made before the trial Court. The defence version was that the deceased was a friend of Muhammad Iqbal as well as his Ustad. On the day of occurrence the deceased was sitting at the shop of Iftikhar and that just on a petty matter they quarrelled. He took up a Mungli and wanted to strike Muhammad Iqbal with that, Muhammad Iqbal had a Rambi which he had brought to the place of occurrence for sharpening. He apprehending danger to his life used that Rambi in exercise of his self-defence and gave the deceased two Rami blows. He had no intention to cause his death. His brother Muhammad Malik was not present at the spot. Learned counsel however, states that in his jail petition Muhammad Iqbal has not taken this defence at all. It is also submitted that there is no injury on the person of Muhammad Iqbal or any other member of the accused party, from which any such inference could be drawn that Muhammad Iqbal had acted in the exercise of his right of self-defence.
4. We grant leave in Criminal Petition No.226 of 1986 in order to examine as to whether or not the generally acknowledged principles of appraisal of evidence have been properly followed in this case by the Lahore High Court Lahore. Non-bail-able warrants to issue for the arrest of Muhammad Malik respondent in Criminal Petition No.226 of 1986. As we have granted leave in Criminal Petition No.226 of 1986 we also granted leave in Criminal Petition No.237 of 1986 and Jail Petition No.30-R of 1986.