' SAAD SAOOD JAN, J:--Sanaullah and his uncle Abdul Khaliq were convicted by the Sessions Judge at Bahawalnagar of offences falling under sections 302, 307, 324 and 323, read with section 34, of the Pakistan Penal Code for causing the death of Muhammad Abbas and his father Murad Ali, making murderous assault upon Mst.Shahnaz Kausar and causing hurt to Javed Iqbal, Ghulam Nabi and Mst.Khurshid Bibi, for the offences under section 302, they were sentenced to death and for the other offences they were sentenced to suffer different terms of imprisonment. In addition, they were also directed to pay fines. On appeal and reference the High Court maintained their convictions for the offences under sections 302 and 323 but set aside their convictions for the offences under sections 307 and 324. In respect of the offence under section 302, it reduced their sentences to imprisonment for life. From the judgment of the High Court both the convicts as well as the complainant party seek leave to appeal from this Court.
2. A year prior to the occurrence, Muhammad Abbas deceased had abducted Mst.Shahnaz Kausar whom he later married. She was the sister of Abdul Khaliq convict. At the instance of Abdul Khaliq a case was registered at Police Station Fort Abbas, During the course of investigation both Muhammad Abbas and Mst. Shahnaz Kausar were arrested and were subsequently challaned. The case ended in a compromise. According to the convicts, the basic condition of the compromise was that Muhammad Abbas would give his sister Mst.Rehana in marriage to Abdul Khaliq but this condition was not fulfilled.
3. The occurrence took place at morning azan-vela on 11-6-1982. It was alleged by the prosecution that the two convicts, armed with guns, went to the land of Murad Ali deceased. At the instance of Abdul Khaliq, Sanaullah attacked Murad Ali with a Kassi and killed him. After that the two convicts went to the house of Murad Ali where Muhammad Abbas deceased was present alongwith Mst.
Kausar Shahnaz, Mst. Khurshid Bibi, Javed Iqbal and Ghulam Nabi. Abdul Khaliq fired at Muhammad Abbas and Sanaullah struck him with a kassi. As Mst. Shahnaz Kausar, Mst. Khurshid Bibi, Ghulam Nabi and Javed Iqbal tried to intervene, they too were assaulted by the convicts with the butts of their guns. The occurrence was reported at P.S. Fort Abbas at 6-30 p.m. On the same day.
4. Both Sanaullah and Abdul Khaliq pleaded not guilty at the trial and alleged that they had been falsely implicated on account of enmity. Sanaullah further stated that at the time of occurrence he was only 14-1/2 year old. In support of his assertion he produced a school leaving certificate (Ex.D.F).
5. At the trial, the prosecution examined Ghulam Abbas (PW 10) who had lodged the F.I.R. As well, Javed Iqbal (PW 9), Mst. Khurshid Bibi (PW 8) and Sardar Muhammad (PW 11) in support of its allegations. Ghulam Abbas (PW 10) gave an ocular account of both the incidents that is, the one which took place in the land of Murad Ali and the other that occurred in the courtyard of Murad Ali's house. Sardar Muhammad (PW 11) supported his account with regard to the killing of Murad Ali.
Javed Iqbal (PW 9) and Khurshid (PW 8) gave evidence with respect to the second mentioned incident. Both the trial Courts as well as the High Court accepted the ocular testimony and we see no reason to take a different view in the matter. It was a pre-concerted attack and the convictions of the convicts were based upon natural witnesses who had no reason to falsely implicate them.
They have already been given the benefit of the lesser penalty provided for an offence under section 302. The petition of the convicts is therefore dismissed.
6. In its petition, the complainant party has challenged the reduction of the convicts' sentences to imprisonment for life. It was the case of the prosecution itself that the motive behind the occurrence was rehabilitation of family honour on account of the abduction of the sister of Abdul Khaliq by Muhammad Abbas, thus in the F.I.R, Ghulam Abbas stated. We are therefore not prepared to interfere with the discretion exercised by the High Court in not confirming the sentence of death imposed upon the convicts by the trial Court. We would therefore refuse to grant leave to the complainant party also.