' ALI HUSSAIN QAZILBASH, J.--This is a petition for leave to appeal against the judgment of a learned Division Bench of the Lahore High Court, dated 3-3-1985.
2. Nazir petitioner alongwith his father Barkat and Nadir, his brother-in-law, residents of Wan Adan, Tehsil Chunian, District Kasur, were tried by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kasur, for having committed the murder of Mst. Fatima and murderous assault on her daughter Mst. Maqsoodan.
Nadir was acquitted of the charge whereas Nazir petitioner and his father were convicted, on 9- 41981, under section 302/34, P.P.C. And were sentenced to death and a fine of Rs,1,000 each or in default to one year's R.I. They were further convicted under section 307/34, P.P.C. And sentenced to ten years' R.I. And a fine of Rs,1,000 or in default to one year's R.I. Each. Both the convicts filed appeal against their conviction and sentence in the High Court. The appeal was partly accepted by the learned Judges of the High Court vide their impugned order in that Barkat was acquitted of both the offences whereas the appeal of the petitioner was dismissed.
3. The occurrence in this case took place on 18-3-1977 at 5-30 p.m. On the thoroughfare of the village, the report of which was lodged by Muhammad Yaqub (P.W.12). The motive as given is that 8/9 months prior to the occurrence the Nikah of Mst. Maqsoodan (P.W.13) was performed with Nazir petitioner and in exchange Mst. Sharifan, sister of the petitioner, was given in marriage to Hakim Ali maternal-uncle of Mst. Maqsoodan but rukhsti in both the cases had not taken place.
Subsequently the relations of the parties became strained and about five months before the occurrence both the girls were divorced by their husbands. It is alleged that the petitioner bore a grudge on this account which led to the present occurrence.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner did not challenge the conviction of his client on merits but has prayed for reduction in his sentence. The learned counsel for the petitioner was repeatedly asked by this Court to place some material before it in support of his prayer for reduction in sentence but he has failed to do so and rightly too because there exists none. We are thus left with no alternative but to dismiss this petition.