Pakistan Case Lawโ† Search
1995 SCMR 917

ALLAH DIWAYA alias ALLAH DITTA vs THE STATE

Citation1995 SCMR 917
CourtSupreme Court of Pakistan
Case No.Criminal Appeal No, 118 of 1994 in Criminal Petition No, 359/L of 1993
Date1994-05-16
Judge(s)Manzoor Hussain Sial, Saad Saood Jan
ResultSentence reduced.

ORDER

' SAAD SAOOD JAN, ACTG. C.J.---The petitioner, Allah Diwaya alias Allah Ditta, was convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Dera Ghazi Khan of the offence under section 302, Pakistan Penal Code for causing the death of Mst. Bakhtawar, deceased, and sentenced him to death and payment of fine. Alongwith him eight other persons were tried. Of these, four were acquitted and the other four were convicted of the offences under section 323, read with section 34, Pakistan Penal Code. On appeal and reference the High Court altered the conviction of the petitioner from one under section 302, Pakistan Penal Code to that under section 304, Part I, of the same Code. It reduced his sentence from death to imprisonment for life, maintaining however the sentence of fine. The petitioner seeks leave to appeal from this Court.

2. The occurrence took place on 21-9-1985 at 6-30 p.m. It was alleged that on account, of some pending litigation the petitioner and the co-accused attacked the complainant party, killing the deceased and causing injuries to Ghulam Shabbir P.W. 6 and Haji Muhammad P.W. 7,

3. After re-appraising the evidence, the High Court found that it was a case of free-fight, precipitated by the attempt of the deceased to extend the area in her possession. The fight was not pre-planned. Accordingly, it set aside the conviction of the petitioner under section 302, Pakistan Penal Code and instead convicted him under section 304, Part 1.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner frankly conceded that he was interested only in the reduction of his sentence. After hearing learned counsel for the State, Khawaja Shaukat Ali, we convert this petition into appeal. After considering the findings of the High Court which have not been challenged before us we are of the opinion that the sentence awarded to the petitioner is excessive. Accordingly, we reduce his substantive sentence to rigorous imprisonment for a period of 10 years. The sentence of fine does not require interference. The petitioner shall be given the benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C. In the computation of his substantive sentence.

Sentence reduced.

For educational and research use only โ€” not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.
DisclaimerยทPrivacyยทTermsยทSearch