1. ' JAVID IQBAL, J.--This petition for leave to appeal is directed against the judgment of the Lahore High Court, Lahore dated 9 January, 1988 whereby appeal of Wilson Masih respondent was accepted to the extent that his death sentence was altered to imprisonment for life. The petition is for enhancement of his sentence to death.
2. ' Briefly the facts are that Wilson Masih respondent was charged under section 302, P.P.C. For the murder of Bhola deceased and vide judgment of the trial Court he was convicted under section 302, P.P.C. And sentenced to death plus fine. On appeal of the convict the conviction was maintained as well as the fine, but the sentence of death was altered to life imprisonment. Hence the present petition.
3. ' The occurrence took place at 4 p.m. On 13 April. The F.I.R. Was present petitioner who is father of the deceased after an hour on the same day. The human blood-stained Chhuri was recovered from the respondent. The prosecution version is supported by two eye-witnesses as well as medical evidence which indicates that there were five sharp-edged weapon injuries on the chest and abdomen of the deceased. The motive as set up by the prosecution was that earlier on the day of occurrence the deceased had purchased biscuits from the respondent who ran a shop near the house of the complainant party. The deceased would not make payment at that time and thus it resulted in a quarrel between them. However the Mohallah Dars separated them. The respondent nourished grudge due to this trivial incident. According to the prosecution version the eye- witnesses arrived at the scene of crime when the deceased and respondent were already quarrelling at the shop of the respondent. When the eyewitnesses reached the spot the respondent armed with a Chhuri inflicted Chhuri blows on the abdomen and chest of the deceased. The High Court while maintaining the conviction of the respondent under section 302, P.P.C., altered the sentence of the respondent from death to imprisonment for life on two grounds which were considered as mitigating circumstance. These are that at the time of the occurrence the age of the respondent was only 16-1/2 years, and secondly that the immediate cause of occurrence remained shrouded in mystery because the eye-witnesses rushed to the scene of crime only when the blows were being inflicted by the respondent to the deceased and it could not be determined as to what was the immediate cause of occurrence. The High Court was also of the view that the motive version as set up by the prosecution had not been witnessed by anyone and no witness had been produced in support of the earlier altercation. Besides that it may be noted that the respondent was only 16-1/2 years old whereas the deceased was stated to be 23 years old.
4. ' Learned counsel for the petitioner attempted to argue before us that in the light of the motive as set up by the prosecution it was a cold-blooded murder and therefore a case was made out for enhancement of sentence awarded to the respondent particularly when there was nothing on the record to show except his own statement that he was 16-1/2 years old.
5. After hearing learned counsel and going through the impugned judgment we do not find any force in the arguments of the learned counsel. In the circumstances of the case the High Court was correct to consider the mitigating circumstance in the light of which the sentence awarded to the respondent was altered. Therefore no case for interference is made out. As a result this petition is dismissed.