1. ' MIAN MUHAMMAD AJMAL, J.---This petition under Article 185(3) of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 calls in question the validity of the judgment of the Lahore, High Court, Lahore dated 13-3-2001, whereby Criminal Appeal No,99 of 1999, of the petitioner as well as Criminal Revision No,373 of 1999 of the complainant, were dismissed and conviction and sentences of the petitioner were maintained.
2. ' Resume of the case is that a case under section 302; P.P.C. Was registered at Police Station Nowshera, District Khushab on the report of Haji Muhammad Iqbal against Ghulam Muhammad petitioner for the murder of Mst. Fatah Khatoon wife of the complainant. According to the complainant on 22-7-1998, he alongwith his wife went to his land for bringing fodder. At about 8-00 a.m. When they reached near Marri Baryal, all of a sudden Ghulam Muhammad petitioner, armed with .12-bore gun emerged from the bushes and gunned down Mst. Fateh Khatoon the deceased.
3. On the alarm of, the complainant, Muhammad Ajmal and Mst. Bevi Zaitoon, reached the spot. The accused fled away from the spot. The accused was arrested on 26-7-1998, who while in custody led to the recovery of shotgun. The petitioner was charged for the murder of Mst. Fateh Khatoon to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. The prosecution in order to prove its case produced 14 witnesses. The accused in statement under section 342 Cr.P.C. Stated that Mst. Bevi Zaitoon, daughter of the complainant and the deceased and wife of Shafiq Ahmad son of the accused petitioner had illicit liaison with Mushtaq Ahmad and at the relevant time Mst. Bevi. Zaitoon and Mst.
4. Fateh Khatoon were sitting in objectionable condition with said Mushtaq Ahmad. On seeing them in that condition he got infuriated and opened fire which accidentally hit Mst. Fateh Khatoon deceased instead of Mst. Bevi Zaitoon. On conclusion of the trial, the learned trial Judge convicted the petitioner under section 302(b), P.P.C. And sentenced him to imprisonment for life as Ta'zir vide his judgment dated 9-1-1999. The petitioner challenged his conviction and sentence before the Lahore High Court, Lahore through Criminal Appeal No,99 of 1999 whereas Haji Muhammad Iqbal complainant filed Criminal Revision No,373 of 1999 for enhancement of sentence of the petitioner. A learned Judge of the High Court vide his judgment dated 13-3-2001 held that the sentence awarded to the petitioner was proper and legal and he declined to enhance the same. Resultantly, the learned Judge dismissed both the appeal as well as the revision petition and maintained the conviction and sentence of the petitioner.
5. ' Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the petitioner on seeing his daughter-in-law in objectionable position with Mushtaq Ahmad, under grave and sudden provocation fired on his daughter-in-law, which accidentally hit Mst. Fateh Khatoon, deceased. He submitted that he had no intention to kill the deceased, therefore, the case would fall under section 302(c), P.P.C. And he was entitled to lesser penalty.
6. ' We do not find any substance in the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner, for, it is not believable that both Mst. Fateh Khatoon and Mst. Bevi Zaitoon the mother and the daughter would be sitting in objectionable condition with Mushtaq Ahmad as alleged by the petitioner in his statement under section 342, Cr.P.C. The contention of the learned counsel that the case of the petitioner would fall under section 302(c), P.P.C. Is without any substance, as, according to section 300, P.P.C., if any person with the intention of causing death or bodily injury to a person, by doing an act which in the ordinary course of nature is likely to cause death, or with the knowledge that his act is so imminently dangerous that it must in all probability cause death, causes the death of a person, is said to have committed Qatl-i-Amd. In the present case, since the petitioner fired with a lethal weapon and thus had the knowledge that his act was so imminently dangerous that it must in all probability cause death, therefore, the offence committed by him would fall under section 302(b), P.P.C. In so far as the contention that the petitioner committed the act under sudden and grave provocation is concerned, the same is not supported by any evidence on record as the allegation that Mst. Bevi Zaitoon, his daughter-in-law alongwith her mother was sitting in objectionable condition with Mushtaq Ahmad, has not been believed. The prosecution has proved its case through reliable evidence and both the learned trial Court as well as the High Court have rightly held the petitioner guilty of the offence and rightly convicted and suitably sentenced him.
7. We do not find any substance in this petition which is dismissed and .