ASLAM RIAZ HUSSAIN, J.-- This order will dispose of: (i) Crl. PSLA No.154/86 filed by Muhammad Siddiq and others for the enhancement of sentence of the respondents in this petition; and (ii) Crl.
PSLA No.194/86 filed by Muhammad Ashraf etc. Against their conviction and sentence, as both the petitions are directed against the same judgment of the High Court dated 19-3-1986.
2. Relevant facts giving rise to Cr1.PSLA No. 194/86 are that Muhammad Ashraf, Manzoor, Muhammad Khan and Iqbal, were tried for the murder of Muhammad Ashraf and Noor Muhammad and making murderous assault on Jawaya (P.W.8), Muhammad Sharif (P.W.8) and Manzoor (PW.9). They were convicted by the trial Court under sections 302/34 and 307, P.P.C. It sentenced each of them to death under section 302/34, P.P.C. While under section 307, P.P.C. Each of them was sentenced to 4 years R.I. They filed an appeal before the High Court which dismissed the same but reduced their sentence of death under section 302, P.P.C. To imprisonment for life.
Still not feeling satisfied they have filed a petition for leave to appeal (Crl. PSLA No.194/86) against their conviction and sentence, while Muhammad Siddique and Mst. Nawab Bibi (widow of Noor Muhammad deceased) have filed a petition (Crl. P.No. 154/86) for the enhancement of their sentences.
3. We have gone through the impugned judgment and heard the learned counsel for the petitioner (in Crl. P. No. 194/86) at some length. All that he seeks is reappraisal of evidence on the record and reversal of finding of fact arrived at by the two Courts below. No question of law has been raised requiring decision by this Court. We do not, therefore, consider this to be a fit case for grant of leave to appeal. The petition is consequently dismissed.
4. As for Crl. PSLA No.154/86 filed by Muhammad Siddique etc. For the enhancement of the sentences of the four respondents in that petition (who are petitioners in the petition dealt with above), we have gone through the relevant portions of the judgment of the High Court and heard the learned counsel for the petitioners in that petition. We are of the view that the reasons recorded by the learned High Court for reducing the sentence of the respondents-accused under sections 302/34 PPC are tenable and do not require interference by this Court. This petition is, therefore, also dismissed.