[Ss. 367,397,399,401,35, Cr.P.C., Ss. 53 to 75, P.P.C.]
Attempt to commit sodomy. Convict-petitioner a young man, not a previous convict. Fine of rupees 600 remitted and 9 months' R.I. already under-gone considered sufficient. (DB) PLD 1970 Lah. 230 Ali Muhammad.
Attempt under sections 376 & 377, P.P.C. The accused cannot be sentenced to more than 5 years' imprisonment. PLD 1959 Lah. 623 Muhammad Ayub.
AMNESTY & MERCY OR REMISSION
Power of President under Article 45 of the Constitution for commutation of sentence is not subject to any limitation. PLD 1992 SC 14. Bhai Khan.
Under Art. 2-A read with Art. 45 of the Constitution of Pakistan, President of Pakistan was competent to commute death sentence. PLJ 1992 S.C. 591, Hakim Khan etc. v. Government of Pakistan.
General amnesty and pendency of appeal. President ordering general amnesty in respect of death sentences and such sentences commuted to transportation for life. Accused appellant not reaping benefit of amnesty due to pendency of his appeal. Sentence of death commuted to life imprisonment. (SC) 1974 SCMR 271 Ibrar. Contra (SC) PLD 1975 SC 179 = PLJ 1975 SC 166 Falak Sher.
Presidential amnesty; death sentence reduced to life imprisonment as the death sentence was awarded on 22-3-1987 and the President of Pakistan granted General Amnesty in 1988. 1995 SCMR 1092, Pervaiz Ahmed.
Amnesty. Where death sentence was confirmed by the High Court before the date of general amnesty i.e., 22 Dec. 1971, the death sentences were automatically commuted to life imprisonment, whether the convicts had appealed to the Supreme Court or not. Ibrar v. State (1974 SCMR 271) distinguished. PLD 1975 SC 179 and 1974 SCMR 430 referred and also. AIR 1961 SC 112 and 1972 SCMR 165. (DB) PLJ 1976 Pesh. 76 Govt. of N.W.F.P. v. Khizar Hayat etc. PLD 1975 Cr.C. (Pesh.) 585.
Sentence of death not confirmed till date of amnesty declared by the President of Pakistan. Amnesty held not applicable to accused appellants in the circumstances. (SC) PLD 1975 SC 179 Falak Sher etc. PLJ 1975 SC 166.
Indulgence or mercy shown to a convict or a group of convicts by reason of an executive flat under some special circumstances cannot influence judicial decision in a subsequent case. (SC) PLD 1976 SC 287 Wali Muhammad etc.
Supreme Court declined to enhance sentence where High Court had reduced the sentence to life imprisonment and President Amnesty was declared after that. 1993 SCMR 693, Ghulam Murtaza v. Muhammad Arif.
Effect of amnesty on lesser sentence awarded by High Court and appeal to Supreme Court for enhancement of sentence, held, due to general amnesty granted in the country, death sentence stood commuted into life imprisonment and as such restoration of death sentence would be relatable to the judgment passed by the High Court and in substitution of it benefit could not be denied to the accused simply because they were wrongly sentenced to lesser penalty for the same offence. 1990 SCMR 40 Muzaffar Saeed v. Aulad Hussain Shah.
Due to amnesty, petition for enhancement of sentence not considered by Supreme Court. Trial Court awarded death sentence on 6-6-1985. High Court reduced it to Life Imprisonment on 11-5-1986 Amnesty proclaimed commuting death sentences to life imprisonment with effect from 6th December, 1988. Had the High Court maintained death sentence it would have been reduced to life imprisonment because of the amnesty, hence the Supreme Court did not consider the petition for enhancement of sentence. 1991 SCMR 696 Zahir Shah v. Muhammad Anwar. 1991 SCMR 1727 Hazrat Jamal v. Fazal Rabbi.
Amnesty, commutation of death sentence. Vide President's Amnesty Order dated 7-12-1988, all those who had been convicted and sentenced to death by the Sessions Court and were awaiting the confirmation of their sentences by the High Court, or in appeal or further appeal or by way of mercy petition before 6th December, 1988 benefitted by reduction of their sentences. PLD 1993 S.C. 14. Eid Muhammad and another.
By general amnesty sentence of death reduced to life imprisonment of one convict, held, it would look incongruous to enhance the sentence of life imprisonment to death of co-accused. Petition dismissed. 1990 SCMR 1132 Kausar Ali, etc. v. Muhammad Sabir, etc.
Leave to appeal for enhancement of sentence could not be granted by the Supreme Court because of amnesty. Two accused already sentenced to death had been benefited by the reprieve and if death sentence had been awarded to others as sought in the petition, the others too would have benefited from the same amnesty order. 1992 SCMR 1401, Abdul Hafeez etc.
Life imprisonment awarded before President's Amnesty Order commuting death sentences, held same could not be enhanced to death by High Court after President's Order of Amnesty. Sentences reduced to life imprisonment by the Supreme Court. 1995 SCMR 1316, Fateh Shah etc.
Enhancement of sentence refused by the Supreme Court on the ground that had High Court sentenced them to death it would have stood commuted to life imprisonment because of Presidential Order of General Amnesty, 1991 SCMR 312(2) Shabrati v. Qamar Sultan, etc.
Due to Presidential amnesty death sentence awarded shall be reduced to 25 years' R.I., and all sentences shall run concurrently except sentences of fine. PLJ 1992 S.C. 249, Bhai Khan.
Benefit of Presidential Amnesty from death to life imprisonment is to be given to the cases which are covered by the provisions of the said order. 1991 SCMR 1468 Jiand 1991 SCMR 1422 Eid Muhammad.
General Amnesty for reduction of death sentence is applicable to only those cases whose death sentence has been confirmed by the High Court and not to others. (Note: confirmation of death sentence by High Court is not required in cases of death sentence awarded by Special Courts) (DB) PLJ 1991 Cr.C. (Lah.) 287. Ahmed etc.
Amnesty; period spent as under-trial prisoner to be counted with reference to Presidential notification that all prisoners attaining the age of 60 years and having served 5 years imprisonment to be released. NLR 1990 Cr. 487 Nazeer v. Home Secretary.
Death sentence awardable as had is not pardonable by head of the Islamic State. PLD 1991 FSC 236. Habibul Wahabul Khairi v. Pakistan.
Amnesty when death sentence not confirmed by High Court. Held, general amnesty applied to persons who were awaiting execution and not to those condemned prisoners whose death sentence had not been confirmed by the High Court, prior to 21-12-1971. (SC) PLD 1977 SC 39 Muhammad Aslam v. Supdt. Jail, etc.
COMPENSATION & FINE
Sentence awarded in default of payment of fine shall be in addition to sentence of 25 years' R.I. in cases of life imprisonment. PLD 1992 SC 14. Bhai Khan.
Fine u/S. 544-A Cr.P.C. is not mandatory. The words "Unless for reasons to be recorded" indicate that the Court can refuse to award compensation to the heirs of the deceased. KLR 1992 Cr.C. 49, Muhammad Sadiq.
Fine u/S. 544-A, Cr.P.C. recovered as arrears of land revenue as the fine was compensatory in nature. 1992 SCMR 459, Farid Bakhsh v. Saeed Ahmed, etc.
Fine compensation. Under section 544-A, Cr.P.C. payment of fine to the heirs of the victim is not only salutary but mandatory too. (SC) PLD 1976 SC 44. Razia Begum v. Hijrait Ali etc.
Fine under section 544-A is mandatory. Sessions Court and High Court overlooked the provision. The Supreme Court imposed fine on the appellant in addition to life sentence. (SC) 1975 SCMR 500 Khalid etc. PLJ 1978 SC 19 Mokha v. Zulfiqar.
Fine u/S. 544-A, Cr.P.C. not imposed on convict by High Court for offence u/S. 304(I), PPC when on grave and sudden provocation the accused killed the deceased who molested his real sister. Supreme Court maintained High Court judgment, 1993 SCMR 245. Muhammad Latif v. Zulfiqar Ali, etc.
Fine as compensation under section 544-A, Cr.P.C. Provisions are mandatory High Court can award compensation in appeal or revision. (DB) 1973 P.Cr.L.J 345 (DB) Aspin Gul etc. (DB) 1973 P.Cr.LJ 164 Mian Khan etc. (DB) PLJ 1973 Lah. 257 = PLJ 1973 Lah. 188 Dost Muhammad (DB) 1974 P.Cr.LJ 391 Muhammad Rafiq.
When the payment of entire amount of fine was ordered to be paid to the legal heirs of the deceased by the trial Court the Supreme Court did not award separate compensation u/S. 544-A, Cr.P.C. 1995 SCMR 1776 Talib Hussain etc.
Compensation u/S. 544-A Cr.P.C. cannot be awarded in case of punishment with death by way of Qisas because compensation or payment is due only under a compromise or by way of Arsh, Daman etc. Enhancement of punishment by such additions is contrary to Injunctions of Islam. However, when offence is reduced from Qisas to Tazir section 544-A, Cr.P.C. is attracted and compensation can be awarded. 1992 SCMR 2037, Manzoor etc.
Fine imposed alongwith sentence of death or life imprisonment for offence u/S. 302, PPC or u/S. 308 PPC cannot be equated with amount of compensation payable to legal heirs of the murdered deceased u/S. 544-A, Cr.P.C. U/S. 544-A, Cr.P.C. Court is bound to award compensation to the legal heirs of the deceased or the injured unless it records reasons in writing for not doing so. 1995 SCMR 1776, Talib Hussain etc.
Compensatory fine not allowed to the heirs of the deceased as he was an immoral person, who was killed when found in compromising position with the wife of the appellant. PLJ 1985 Cr.C. (Lah.) 115. Ghulam Murtaza.
Compensation and immoral woman. Award of compensation to the heirs of immoral woman under section 544-A, Cr.P.C. is not proper. Fine of Rs. 2,000 remitted. NLR 1982 Cr. 321. Maqsood Ahmed.
Payment of compensation to the heirs of the adulteress u/S. 544-A, Cr.P.C. is not mandatory. PLJ 1991 Cr.C. (Lah.) 171 Sadiq v. Muhammad Yaqub, etc. = NLR 1991 Cr. 361.
Remission of compensation on ground of public morality, as the deceased had illicit relations with the wife of the accused, who was also done to death at the spot. (DB) PLJ 1990 Cr.C. (Kar.) 449 Muhammad Bakhsh.
Fine under section 544-A, Cr.P.C. Award of compensation to heirs of person killed etc. is a "salutary" and "mandatory" provisions. Object is to alleviate suffering. It can be an effective deterrent against crime. Compensation though recoverable as fine is not fine. Court at penultimate stage of case to receive evidence in inquiry to determine amount of compensation. Compensation to be commensurate with loss suffered and with capacity of accused to pay. Power to conduct such inquiry incidental or ancillary to main power exercisable under section 544-A. (SC) PLD 1974 SC 87 State v. Rabnawaz. (DB) PLJ 1978 Cr.C. (Lah.) 371 Muhammad Younas.
Compensation to the injured is mandatory. The injured party was awarded Rs. 10,000 out of the fine if recovered. (SC) 1977 SCMR 471. Muhammad Hanif v. Abdur Rehman etc.
Accused killing his own wife. Imposition of fine as compensation not justified. 1975 P.Cr.LJ 652 Riaz Ahmed.
Imposition of fine on persons sentenced to death is unnecessary. It is improper to impose fine in addition to long terms of imprisonment. (DB) PLD 1979 Kar. 261 Bagh etc. PLJ 1979 Cr.C. (Kar.) 219.
Recovery of fine stopped when sentence in default of payment of fine had already been undergone, u/S. 386(1)(b) proviso Cr.P.C. PLJ 1993 S.C. 410, Bashir Ahmed v. Muhammad Saddiq etc. = 1993 SCMR 1671.
Sentence in default of fine cannot be made to run concurrently. It is illegal (DB) AIR 1940 Lah. 388 Crown v. Chanan Singh = ILR 1940 Lah. 143 = AIR 1940 Lah. 209 Emperor v. Haji.
Section 325, P.P.C. sentence of fine only is not legal. A sentence of imprisonment however short is necessary. High Court under section 439, Cr.P.C. can impose legal sentence. (DB) PLD 1956 Dacca 106 Wali Bhuyia v. Ahizuddin.
"Shall also be liable to fine" does not mean "shall be fined" It is the discretion of the Court to impose fine or not. (FB) PLD 1963 Kar. 256 Koro (DB) Overruled PLD 1962 Lah. 1 State v. Muhammad Akbar which held, that the sentence of fine is absolutely necessary where it is provided that "shall also be liable to fine".
Shall also be liable to fine, word shall appearing in sections 467, 468, 471, 420, PPC does not mean that fine must be imposed. Fine may not be awarded in appropriate cases. AIR 1968 Pat. 287 relied upon. PLJ 1989 Cr.C. (Lah.) 93. State v. Nazir Hussain Shah.
Sentence of imprisonment, is not necessary for offence under section 309, P.P.C. ILR 15 Lah. 872 Mst. Barkat v. Crown.
Customs case; sentence to carrier is always less than what is awarded to the owner or the beneficiary of the goods. NLR 1984 Cr. 55. State v. Muhammad Hanif.
Customs case, value of goods recovered less than Rs. 10,000. Held, conviction and sentence cannot be maintained. NLR 1984 Cr. 53 Noor Din etc.
Sentence in excise cases, 7 seers of opium recovered. Heavy fine is to be preferred to sentence of imprisonment. Sentence of imprisonment reduced to that of fine. Fine enhanced from Rs. 1,000 to Rs. 5,000 (DB) PLD 1967 Kar. 574 Abdus Sattar.
Accused found in possession of 1,700 grams of charas. Sentence reduced from two years to one year but fine enhanced to Rs. 5,000/- 1984 SCMR 640 Faiz Ullah.
Sentence under section 409, P.P.C. Accused agreed to pay the entire misappropriated amount of Rs. 16,600 and fine. Supreme Court altered the sentence of High Court awarding 1 year's R.I. and fine of Rs. 5,000 to fine of Rs. 17,000 (i.e. 16,600 + 400 as fine) and simple imprisonment till the rising of the Court. (SC) 1972 SCMR 118 Saeed Zakria.
Fine should not be imposed beyond the capacity, of the convict to pay. Fine reduced by the High Court. AIR 1934 Lah. 677 Allah Ditta v. Emperor. PLD 1955 Lah. 650 Muhammad Sharif.
Fine cannot be imposed u/S. 10 (3) of Zina Ordinance of 1979. PLJ 1982 FSC 114. Ghulam Rasul.
Imprisonment suffered in default of payment of fine. Fine can still be recovered. (DB) 42 Cr.L.J 534 Collector v. Ochhavlal.
Imprisonment suffered in lieu of fine. When sentence is undergone in lieu of the fine is not recoverable after that except for special reasons to be recorded as provided in section 386, Cr.P.C. 1976 P.Cr.LJ 774 Inayat Ali v. Muhammad Ishaq etc.
Enhancement of fine and reduction of sentence of imprisonment. It is not proper to send petitioners to jail after 10 years of occurrence. Revision dismissed. Sentence of imprisonment reduced to already undergone (5 months) for offences u/Ss. 307,326,148/149, PPC but amount of fine enhanced to Rs. 10,000 for each accused to be paid to the victim. PLJ 1991 Cr.C. (Lah.) 168. Rajada and 3 others.
Sentence in lieu of fine to run concurrently, with life imprisonment. 1985 SCMR 838. Tufail Masih.
Fine remitted. Appellant defended at Govt. expenses, appearing to be poor. Sentence of fine remitted. (DB) 1976 P.Cr.LJ 1324 Anwar Khan.
No compensation to be awarded u/S. 544-A, Cr.P.C. to the heirs of an immoral woman. PLJ 1987 Cr.C. (Lah.) 383. Muhammad Sharif = PLD 1987 Lah. 312.
Fine u/S. 544-A, Cr.P.C. set aside as the accused was convicted u/S. 304(1), PPC for causing double murder under grave and sudden provocation. (DB) NLR 1988 Cr. 325 Nawab Ali etc.
Fine u/S. 544-A, Cr.P.C. is to be awarded in addition to sentence of fine otherwise imposed. This fine is to be recovered as arrears of land revenue. PLJ 1990 Cr.C. (Pesh.) 130 Umar Hayat.
Compensation u/S. 250, Cr.P.C. set aside when Trial Court did not call upon the complainant to show cause u/S. 250(1), Cr.P.C. Acquittal ordered by giving benefit of doubt and there was no finding that the complaint was false, frivolous or vexatious. PLD 1992 Kar. 135, Muhammad Banaras.
(also see composition of offences)
Offence u/S. 302, PPC compromised u/S. 345, Cr.P.C. All legal heirs of deceased made statement in the Court to that effect that they had forgiven the accused. Compromise accepted and the appellant acquitted. (DB) 1992 P.Cr.LJ 443. Muhammad Mazhar.
Composition of the offence of murder does not entitle the accused to clean acquittal. The accused sentenced to 5 years' R.I. as ta'zir u/S. 311, PPC. Grant of AFW by wali however did not effect the convictions and sentences recorded against the accused u/Ss. 353/34, 365/34, 307/34, PPC (DB) PLD 1992 Lah. 75. Tariq Mahmood.
Justice with mercy: Fair play, good conscience and equality demand that where victim or a person prosecuting a remedy on his behalf agree to a concession by forgiving an act of the accused, Court should lean in favour of grant of concession by dispensing justice with mercy rather than creating hardships. PLJ 1996 Cr.C. (Kar.) 1672, Mureed v. Golo etc.
Death sentence stayed to consider whether sentence of death passed by Military Court can be reduced when the heirs of the deceased have compromised and pardoned the accused. The petition was against the order of the Federal Shariat Court refusing to entertain the petition for lack of jurisdiction. 1985 SCMR 1255. Muhammad Yaqub v. Government of Pakistan.
Compromise where life imprisonment already awarded in a capital case. Supreme Court did not reduce the sentence. 1984 SCMR 581. Mahboob Ali etc.
Compromise in death case and payment of Rs. 40,000 as compensation. Sentence reduced to life imprisonment and fine set aside. Benefit under section 382-B, Cr.P.C. also allowed. 1983 SCMR 631. Nazar Muhammad 1985 SCMR 81. Muhammad Bashir. PLJ 1982 SC 713 Iftikhar Ahmed.
Compromise in murder case: sentence of death reduced to life imprisonment. 1982 SCMR 695. Muzaffar Mustafa.
Compromise made and compensation paid to the heirs of the deceased. Death sentence reduced to life imprisonment and fine also remitted. PLJ 1983 SC 366. Nazar Muhammad. NLR 1983 Cr. 325. Javed etc.
Compromise in SC death sentence reduced with benefit u/S. 382-B (SC) NLR 1985 Cr. 482. Ghulam Jaffer, Muhammad Akram, Muhammad Latif.
Compromise in murder case: Lesser sentence given by Supreme Court. PLJ 1985 SC 206. Muhammad Rafiq. PLD 1985 SC 207.
Compromise in non-compoundable offence: When compromise was effected at appellate stage for offence under section 307/34, PPC. sentence was reduced to the period already undergone, by the High Court. NLR 1984 Cr. 205. Muhammad Tufail.
Compromise for offence under section 304(1), PPC made between parties and compromise deed signed by them placed on record. The accused party paid a sum of Rs. 80,000 to the widow and children of the deceased. The accused had already served a sentence of 5 years. Sentence reduced to one already undergone. 1984 SCMR 488. Inayat Ullah etc. 1983 SCMR 889. Khizar Hayat etc.
Compromise after conviction. Sentence of 12 months' R.I. under section 304-A, PPC was reduced to the sentence already undergone when widow of the deceased compromised with the accused. NLR 1984 Cr. 242 Feroz Khan.
Compromise for offence under section 307, PPC was effected at the Supreme Court stage. Supreme Court reduced the fine from Rs. 10,000 to 5,000/- NLR 1984 Cr. 241 Ghulam Haider.
Compromise in non-compoundable case: In case u/S. 326, PPC Supreme Court accepted the compromise and reduced the sentence of four years u/S. 326, PPC to already undergone. (SC) NLR 1985 Cr. 709 Pir Bakhsh etc.
In compromise in murder cases the Court to consider:
1. Whether the compromise is genuine?
2. Whether compromise was obtained by threats, pressure or coercion?
3. What benefit has been given to the aggrieved party. PLJ 1987 SC 74. Sardar Muhammad etc.
Compromise accepted by High Court in case u/S. 302, PPC death sentence reduced to life imprisonment, with benefit u/S. 382-B, Cr.P.C. (DB) NLR 1987 Cr. 609. Muhammad Yousaf etc.
Compromise in murder case accepted as parties were closely related to the deceased and to maintain good relations in future. Death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. 1988 SCMR 868. Abdul Rashid etc.
Compromise and lesser sentence: Accused paying compensation to heirs of deceased. Death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. 1986 SCMR 1420. Muhammad Aqeel.
Compromise in murder case in application u/S. 561-A, Cr.P.C. made to the High Court when parents of the deceased compromised the case of Rs. 60,000 as ransom money and forgave the accused. The High Court of Azad Jammu and Kashmir quashed the judgment of death sentence and released the accused. PLJ 1986 Cr.C. (Azad J & K) 523. Sabir Hussain.
Diyyat and compromise: When some of the heirs pardon the accused and some do not, the sentence of death cannot be executed. (DB) PLJ 1986 Cr.C. (Azad J & K) 526. Muhammad Khalil.
CONCURRENT AND CONSECUTIVE SENTENCES
Maximum consecutive sentence is not to exceed 14 years u/S. 35, Cr.P.C. Where accused was sentenced to life imprisonment on two counts not specifying whether the sentences were to run concurrently or consecutively, held that total sentence could not exceed life imprisonment. Sentences ordered to run concurrently. 1986 SCMR 1627. Muhammad Ittefaq NLR 1986 Cr. 900.
Sentence of more than 25 years at one trial. No doubt u/S. 35, (2) (a), Cr.P.C. award of more than 25 years sentence as a whole at one trial is prohibited, but when the Supreme Court refused to grant leave to appeal, the High Court could not order the sentence to run concurrently. (DB) PLJ 1991 Cr.C. (Lah.) 322 Mureed Hussain etc.
Sub-section (2) of section 35, Cr.P.C. does not apply to the sentence awarded by the Sessions Court in original trial. Sentence of life imprisonment unless ordered to run concurrently under section 35 (1), Cr.P.C. will run consecutively. PLD 1991 S.C. 1145 Bashir etc.
Executive Order of Commutation of Death Sentence to life imprisonment takes effect forthwith making such sentence to run concurrently with any other sentence awarded by the Court. PLD 1991 S.C. 1145. Bashir etc.
Sentence in two different cases made concurrent by the High Court u/S. 397. Cr.P.C. the accused was already undergoing life imprisonment awarded by Special Military Court. High Court directed that 5 years' R.I. awarded by Special Judge, Anti-Corruption to run concurrently with the life sentence. PLJ 1987 Cr.C. (Pesh.) 437. Altaf Hussain.
Life sentences not to run consecutively. Life imprisonment on two counts ordered to run concurrently as consecutive sentences would be violative of Section 35(2) of Cr.P.C. 1987 SCMR 1382 Khan Zaman. 1986 SCMR 1573 Juma Khan. 1986 SCMR 1627 Muhammad Ittefaq.
After commutation of death sentence on 5 counts the sentences of life imprisonments are to run concurrently as the amnesty order takes effect immediately. 1994 SCMR 582, Shah Muhammad. Also see PLD 1992 S.C. 14, Bhai Khan etc.
Two sentences awarded in two different FIRs can be made to run does not do so the sentences shall be concurrent. PLJ 1998 Lah. 62, Sleem Raza.
Sentences cannot be made to run concurrently when death sentence is commuted to life imprisonment by amnesty. Sections 35(1) and 397, Cr.P.C. cannot be applied. 1992 SCMR 1424, Gullat Shah.
Consecutive sentence. Where the Magistrate passes two separate sentences of imprisonment, but does not specify that they are to run concurrently, they must be held to have been ordered to run consecutively under section 35, Cr.P.C. 40 Cr.LJ 751 Sheikh Idris v. Emperor.
Normal rule is that the sentence, should be consecutive and they must be made to run concurrently only if there is some reason. 52 Cr.LJ 912 (All.) Khuda Bux.
Consecutive sentences. When no order to run concurrently is passed at 3 different trials orders of which are announced on one day, the sentences will run consecutively. PLD 1950 Lah. 497 Gulzar Muhammad.
Concurrent sentences. When a trial Judge does not order that the sentence is to run concurrently with the sentence the convict is already undergoing it is to run consecutively. High Court in appeal or revision has power to direct that both the sentences, though in separate cases may run concurrently. PLD 1977 Kar. 833 Zakir Ali. PLJ 1977 Kar. 510.
Proviso (a) to Sec. 35(3), Cr.P.C. does not apply to sentences awarded in Sessions trials. It does not apply to life-imprisonment sentence awarded in murder trial.
Sentence of life-imprisonment unless ordered to run concurrently u/S. 35 (1), Cr.P.C. will run consecutively.
When death sentence commuted to life imprisonment by executive order it commences immediately and will run concurrently with any other sentence. PLJ 1992 SC 1. Bashir etc. OVERRULED: 1985 SCMR 153. Javed Sheikh; 1986 SCMR 1573. Juma Khan etc. 1986 SCMR 1382. Khan Zaman etc.
Consecutive sentences not to exceed 14 years: Trial Court awarded life imprisonment u/S. 302, PPC and in the same trial also awarded consecutive sentences of 7 years' R.I. u/S. 307, PPC. Supreme Court, held, that consecutive sentences aggregating more than 14 years cannot be awarded u/S. 35, Cr.P.C. the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. 1985 SCMR 153. Javed Sheikh.
Power to make sentences of different trials to run concurrently. Under section 397, Cr.P.C. the Court has now power to order, in the case of an accused person who is already undergoing imprisonment for another offence, that a subsequent sentence of imprisonment passed on him shall take effect at once and run concurrently with the sentence he is undergoing. High Court (Lahore) Rules and Orders 1942, Volume III, Chapter 19-A, p. 3.
Section 71, P.P.C. and section 235, Cr.P.C. Same facts constituting offences under two different statutes. Held, imposition of separate sentence on each count is illegal. PLD 1959 Dacca 931 Fazal-ul-Haque. 1974 SCMR 199. Akhtar Hussain Khan, 1976 P.Cr.LJ 625 Zahir-ud-Din.
Two different judgments passed on the same day sentenced a person to 6 months' R.I. in one and to 2 months' R.I. in another. 6 months' R.I. was set aside in appeal, 2 months' R.I. already suffered was considered to have been for the other judgment not set aside. AIR 1947 Sindh 63 Partumal v. Emperor.
Offence under two or more enactments. Trial or conviction under different enactments is valid but separate consecutive sentences cannot be passed (See section 26, General Clauses Act). PLD 1961 Lah. 269 Niaz Ali. (FB) AIR 1932 Nag. 121 Muhammad Gul v. Emperor.
One act punishable under 2 different sections of the Code. Accused may be convicted under both the sections but he should be punished only under that section which imposes the higher penalty. AIR 1930 Lah. 266 Bhagat Singh 1978 P.Cr.LJ 200 Muhammad Amin.
House-trespass and attempt to murder. Accused may be convicted of both the offences, but a separate sentence for each offence is not justifiable. AIR 1920 Lah. 312 (1) Barkat v. Emperor.
Dacoity in respect of property of 2 persons at the same time from two houses of the same village. They can be punished only for one offence of dacoity. 1889 SJLB 444 Naga San Dun.
Sections 326 and 323, P.P.C.. One man had grievous and simple injuries. Separate sentences cannot be passed under sections 326 and 323, B.B.C.. AIR 1927 Oudh 313 Devi Shahi.
Major offence includes the minor. Accused convicted and sentenced under sections 304/149 and 325/149, P.P.C. by virtue of being a member of unlawful assembly and not for causing injuries. Sentence under section 325/149, P.P.C. set aside. Held, major offence included minor offence. AIR 1925 Lah. 539 Qadir Bakhsh.
Consent of abductee when minor but not altogether a child makes no difference in case u/S. 363, P.P.C. but it has a bearing on the sentence. Sentence reduced. AIR 1926 Lah. 547 (2) Khem Das. 1926 Lah. 677 Wali Muhammad.
Abduction and rape. Where a person abducts a woman and rapes her. He can be awarded separate consecutive sentences under sections 366 and 376, P.P.C.. the two offences being quite distinct. ILR 7 Lah. 484 Ghulam Muhammad v. Crown. Contra. AIR 1926 Lah. 212 Imam Ali v. Emperor.
Consecutive sentences u/Ss. 366 and 376, P.P.C.. where the real offence is rape and abduction is an aggravating circumstance separate sentences under both the sections not be given. AIR 1926 Lah. 114 Buta Singh. AIR 1926 Lah. 212 Inam Ali.
Sentences under sections 302 and 201, P.P.C. combinations of convictions under sections 302 and 201, P.P.C. is not permissible. Conviction and sentence under section 201, P.P.C. set aside. 1977 P.Cr.LJ 1066 Piran Ditta.
Consecutive sentences for sections 394 and 397, Penal Code are illegal if they are based on the same set of facts. AIR 1926 Lah. 47(2) Mamrez etc.
Separate sentence u/Ss. 147 and 332, P.P.C. is not illegal. AIR 1926 Lah. 521 Rehman etc.
Separate sentence u/Ss. 147 and 332, P.P.C. are illegal. AIR 1926 Lah. 581 Manak Chand.
Separate sentences under section 148 and hurt. Where the accused is guilty of hurt only by virtue of section 149, P.P.C. and has not caused the hurt himself, separate conviction under section 148 and hurt can be made but separate sentences should not be passed or should be made to run concurrently. (DB) PLD 1957 Kar 801 Attal 52 Cal. 197 (PC) Barindra Kumar Ghose v. Emperor.
Different persons injured, one had grievous injury, the other simple hurt. The Court to impose separate and accumulative sentences. 27 PLR 347 = 27 Cr.LJ 818 Pira v. Emperor.
Heavy sentence for trivial offence not to be awarded. Sentence of transportation for life reduced to 12 months' R.I. for 7th conviction, for picking pocket of Rs. 10-2 as 6 pies. (DB) ILR (1930) XI Lah. 115. Maulu v. Crown.
CONSISTENCY IN SENTENCE
Consistency in sentence: Appellant causing death of the deceased given lesser sentence. The sentence of other appellant also reduced to life imprisonment. (DB) PLJ 1988 Cr.C. (Lah.) 307 Abdul Sattar.
Principle of consistency in awarding sentence followed when the co-accused with identical role was awarded life sentence. Fatal injuries 5 in number and all of them not attributed to the appellant. PLJ 1988 SC 44. Saif-ur-Rehman.
Discrimination. Guilt of several persons concerned in the crime proved almost equal and undistinguishable. High Court out of 4 persons sentencing one to death and rest to life imprisonment. Held, that the mere fact that the other three had been awarded lesser penalty is no ground for interfering with the sentence. (SC) PLD 1975 SC 478 Nabu Contra. PLD 1970 (SC) 447 Shaheb Ali.
In Zina Hadood case sentence reduced from 10 years to 5 years' as in identical cases 5 years R.I. was held sufficient. Benefit u/S. 382-B, Cr.P.C. also given. 1983 SCMR 942 was referred. 1990 SCMR 380 Samandar Khan.
Rule of consistency. Offences u/Ss. 365, 377, 395 & 397, PPC co-accused charged with the same offences and convicted by the same Court. Reasons given by High Court for accepting the appeal equally apply to the appellant. Appeal accepted on the rule of consistency. (DB) PLJ 1991 Cr.C. (Lah.) 394. Aurangzeb.
Consistency in sentence: Co-accused sentenced to life imprisonment. Cases of the appellant not different from that of the co-accused. Death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. PLJ 1984 Cr.C. (Pesh.) 487 Azam Khan.
Principle of consistency. When trial Court acquits 3 accused as there was no corroboration of the evidence of PWs. and High Court did not interfere in acquittal, held, the appellant deserves acquittal for the same reasons on principle of consistency. PLJ 1993 S.C. 91, Ashiq Hussain.
CONSTRUCTIVE OR VICARIOUS LIABILITY
[Also See Common Intention & Common Object]
Vicarious liability under section 34 or section 149, P.P.C. where death is intended and the murder is premeditated the offender should usually be sentenced to death irrespective of whether the vicarious liability arises by reason of section 34 or section 149; but where the common object of the unlawful assembly is the beating of a man and death is not intended but is a likely consequence of the riot the death sentence is withheld from those who are only constructively liable but is imposed on the particular member of the unlawful assembly who brought about the death. 49 Cr.LJ 26 Gurdev Singh etc. v. Emp.
Constructive guilty of murder. Capital sentence is not improper even in cases of constructive guilt of murder. (DB) AIR 1933 Pat. 100 Musaddi Rai v. Emperor.
Vicarious liability in penal laws is not recognised. (FB) PLD 1963 Kar. 256 Koro.
Constructive liability, fatal injury not attributable with certainty to one or the other of the two accused. Liability of the accused constructive. Death sentence reduced to transportation for life. (DB) 1968 P.Cr.LJ 791 Godho etc.
Instigator sentenced to death. Actual perpetrators of murder turned approvers. (DB) PLD 1956 Lah. 100 Abdul Qadir v. Crown.
ENHANCEMENT OF SENTENCE
Enhancement of sentence u/S. 75, P.P.C. cannot be done when 12 years have passed after previous conviction. AIR 1926 Lah. 617 Ishar Singh.
Enhancement of sentence in brutal murder. Supreme Court allowed leave to appeal when sentence awarded by High Court was light one. PLJ 1986 SC 59. Makhni Bi v. Muhammad Yasin etc.
Sentence enhanced to death when no mitigating circumstance was found in favour of the accused. 1986 SCMR 1056. Jetha Ram v. Weram.
High Court can enhance sentence in revision when accused tried by Magistrate first class with powers u/S. 30, Cr.P.C. although in Second Schedule of Cr.P.C. the offence is mentioned as triable by Magistrate first class. 1988 SCMR 472. Bashir Ahmed.
No reasons given for enhancing life sentence to death. Such penalty imposed by High Court set aside. PLJ 1982 SC 480. Mian Khan.
Enhancement. After discharge from Jail. It is not desirable to lay down any precedent for enhancement of sentence in revision. Each case is to be judged on its own merits. High Court is not barred from enhancing the sentence after the accused is released from jail. (SC) 1976 SCMR 359 Zaring.
Beating given by police officials, nakail put in the nose and paraded through bazar in nude condition. held, the acts as wholly illegal and inhuman. Supreme Court took serious view of the matter and enhanced the sentence of the principal police officials (culprits) in the case. As the case was very old 6 months' R.I. was awarded to Anar Gul Khan Inspector Police for offence u/Ss. 323 and 504 PPC. 1993 SCMR 2177, Talib Hussain v. Anar Gul Khan etc. = PLJ 1993 SC 795.
Revision for enhancement of sentence made at the end of 1966 against one of four accused only whereas accused convicted in 1964. Application held, without force. 1968 P.Cr.LJ 1037. Muslim Ali etc.
Enhancement. Appeal not being prosecuted. All convicts securing release from jail after undergoing entire sentence of imprisonment including remissions. Sentence not enhanced. (SC) PLD 1976 SC 452 Muhammad Sharif. PLJ 1976 SC 346.
Enhancement of sentence. In trial under section 302, PPC the accused sentenced to a fine of Rs. 6.00 and imprisonment till the rising of the Court under section 325/114, PPC. The High Court did not interfere with sentence. (DB) PLD 1956 Sindh 77 Crown v. Begum of Junagarh.
Enhancement of sentence by fine. When prisoner's sentence could not be enhanced to death as he had already served sentence of life imprisonment, respondent though deserving death sentence fine of Rs. 25,000 imposed as enhanced sentence. PLJ 1982 SC 410. Mst. Razia Begum v. Jahangir etc. NLR 1982 Cr. 345.
High Court in revision could not have enhanced the fine of Rs. 5,000/- to Rs.10,000/- as the case had been tried by a Magistrate first class who could not impose more than Rs. 5,000/- as fine. 1982 PSC 727. Shaukat Ali. (SC) NLR 1982 Cr. 339.
Revision against conviction rejected by High Court after full hearing. Notice to accused to show-cause why sentence be not enhanced. Accused entitled afresh to show-cause against conviction. (DB) PLJ 1950 Lah. 479 Crown v. Ghulam Muhammad (DB) PLD 1955 Sindh 306 Crown v. Misri.
Enhancement of sentence. High Court enhanced the sentence from transportation to death. Federal Court approved it, as the discretion was rightly exercised, giving sound reasons. (SC) PLD 1955 FC 42 Talib v. Crown.
Enhancement. Protracted trial may be a ground against enhancement. (DB) PLD 1957 Kar. 824 Ghulam Ahmed Khan.
Enhancement: Sentence served out or fine paid, may be enhanced in revision by High Court. PLD 1955 Lah. 364 Faiz Ali v. Muhammad Ayub.
High Court under section 439, Cr.P.C. has power to enhance sentence beyond the powers of trial Court. Except under section 439 (3), when tried by Magistrate of First Class or below. (DB) PLD 1966 Dacca 83 Imam Ali.
Sentence could not be enhanced by Federal Shariat Court in revision as u/S. 439, Cr.P.C. read with Art. 3 of the Prohibition Order, 1979 as the trial Court; Magistrate first class; had already exhausted his full powers so far as imprisonment and fine were concerned, however sentence of 30 stripes being mandatory as held to be justifiably imposed by the Federal Shariat Court. Sentence reduced to that awarded by the trial Court. PLJ 1995 S.C. 2524, Rabnawaz and another.
Sentence cannot be enhanced suo motu in appeal against conviction specially when no notice had been given to the Appellant nor State had moved for the enhancement of the sentence. Order set aside. PLD 1996 Q 37, Jumma Khan.
There is no warrant in Criminal Procedure Code that when an accused person has been tried by a Court, the Appellate or Revisional Court cannot inflict on him a sentence in excess of the powers of the trial Court. However, it was not desirable, except in exceptional cases, for the appellate Court to pass a sentence exceeding that awardable by the Magistrate who tried the case. (SC) PLD 1957 SC (Pak.) 143 Muhammad Munir. PLD 1959 Lah. 677 State v. Wali Muhammad.
Murder case. Power to enhance sentence should be sparingly exercised by High Court. It should be exercised only when failure to do so would lead to serious miscarriage of justice. (DB) AIR 1938 Lah. 260 Utman Singh v. Emperor.
Murder case. Where 3 accused persons have been found guilty of a deliberate and premeditated murder there is no justification for refraining from passing the death sentence on all three, merely because it cannot be said which of the accused struck the fatal blow. (DB) ILR 1935 (16) Lah. 1131. AIR 1935 Lah. 337 Mewa v. Crown.
Being a student is not ground for passing light sentence. Offence premeditated having its origin in petty quarrel. Sentence till the rising of the Court enhanced to 9 months' R.I. under section 307, PPC. PLD 1958 Lah. 704 State v. Mukhtar.
Court's duty to have regard for victim's feelings. Conviction under section 326/149, PPC altered to under section 302/149, PPC for the murder of two and transportation for life awarded. Sentence of years' R.I. under section 326/149, considered grossly inadequate. (DB) PLD 1950 Lah. 854 Feroze.
Sentence enhanced after the accused had served out his original sentence. PLD 1967 Lah. 357 Atta Muhammad; ILR 1 Lah. 453 and AIR 1928 Lah. 961 rel. PLD 1955 Lah. 364 Faiz Ali v. Muhammad Ayub.
State not moving for enhancement of life imprisonment. Murder committed 8 years ago. Complainant not pressing appeal. Sentence not enhanced. (SC) PLD 1977 SC 4 Farid Alam v. Aslam etc.
Enhancement suo motu from life imprisonment to death by High Court. Lapse of time not considered an extenuating circumstance in the instant case. PLJ 1980 Cr.C. (Lah.) 196. Manzoor Hussain.
Enhancement notice withdrawn: Offence under section 302, PPC. Accused in prison for 2 years. Death sentence also commuted by Government as general amnesty. Suo motu reference for enhancement withdrawn. (DB) 1972 P.Cr.LJ 313 Mangsi etc.
Notice for enhancement: Notice to show cause of enhancement, although revision of the accused dismissed yet he is entitled to show cause against conviction. PLD 1950 Lah. 479; PLD 1955 Sindh 366; PLD 1950 BJ 94 Ghulam Qadir v. Nur Ahmed.
Enhancement of sentence (or to set aside acquittal) to be done when there is misreading of evidence on a substantial point or there is miscarriage of justice. PLJ 1991 SC 537. Ghulam Abbas v. Mazhar Abbas.
Enhancement in corruption case. Suo motu notice recalled because proceedings against the accused took more than four and a half years, accused lost his job with no chance of Government or Semi-Government re-employment. 1975 P.Cr.LJ 473 Zulfiqar Hussain.
Supreme Court is reluctant to interfere in legal sentence passed by Trial Court, Appellate or Revisional Court unless some principle of law is involved. 1994 SCMR 35, Abdul Aziz; 1994 SCMR 45, Ghulam Hussain v. Nasir etc.
EXPECTANCY OF LIFE
Expectancy of life principle not to apply in every case. Each case to be judged on its own merits. Accused acquitted by one or both the Courts below, while acquittal set aside by Supreme Court, held, Supreme Court to always lean towards awarding maximum penalty in case of there being element of cruelty. PLJ 1987 SC 413. Maqbool Ahmed.
Expectancy of life considered and sentence of life imprisonment passed for offence u/S. 302, PPC when the accused were acquitted in 1976 and State Appeal accepted in February, 1988. (DB) NLR 1988 Cr. 513 State v. Farid.
Expectancy of life principle cannot be considered just because leave to appeal was granted, but it can be considered in cases where accused is acquitted by the Court appealed from. 1985 SCMR 2070. Pir Badshah.
Expectation of life. Accused arrested in 1963 and acquitted by High Court on 15th June, 1967. Thus, he had expectation of life for over 2 years since his acquittal. Transportation for life instead of death ordered. (SC) 1970 SCMR 12 A.G. East Pak. v. Majid. (SC) PLD 1974 SC 87 State v. Rab Nawaz etc.
Mere fact that the accused after their acquittal by the High Court had acquired an expectation of life is no ground for not exacting extreme penalty. (SC) PLD 1971 SC 541 Asadullah v. Muhammad Ali etc.
"(In the above case incident took place between 19th/20th March, 1964, High Court acquitted the accused on 26th October, 1966. Supreme Court decided the appeal on 14th June, 1971 and passed death sentence after 7 years of the incident).
High Court altering sentence of death to 7 years' R.I. Accused having been given expectation of life several years back, sentence of death not passed. Sentenced to transportation for life. (SC) 1973 SCMR 300. Muhammad Nawab v. Muhammad Sadiq. (SC) 1973 SCMR 389 State v. Fateh Khan.
Consistent practice of the Supreme Court is not to inflict penalty of death where long lapse of time takes place since occurrence particularly where High Court gives expectation of life. Accused respondent not given death sentence when there was a delay of 5 years. (SC) 1977 SCMR 159 Niaz Ahmad v. Naim Akhtar.
Accused appellant having had expectation of life for more than 2 years (during the pendency of his appeal in the Supreme Court, held, this fact could be taken into account by authorities empowered to commute sentence of death, is no sufficient ground on legal plane for reduction of sentence by Supreme Court. (SC) 1974 SCMR 324 Ayub Khan etc.
Doctrine not to be invoked indiscriminately. Occurrence of double murder on 14-1-1967. Respondent sentenced to death. High Court acquitted them on 21-2-1969. Leave granted by the Supreme Court on 7-7-1971. Respondents sentenced to death despite the lapse of 6 years since their acquittal and their expectancy of survival: in view of increasing danger to and insecurity of human life and liberty and alarming rise in the incidence of crime; specially in view of brutality and cold-blooded murders. (SC) PLD 1975 SC 227 Abdur Rashid.
High Court altered the charge under section 302 to Section 304(1), giving expectancy of life to the accused. Held, the contention cannot outweigh the atrocious features of the case, and the accused definitely did not deserve any leniency. (SC) PLD 1975 SC 607 Muhammad v. Dost Muhammad PLJ 1975 SC 406.
Mitigation: expectation of life doctrine. When victim's death caused in cruel and calculated manner, reduction of normal sentence of death would be a grave miscarriage of justice. (SC) PLD 1976 SC 44 Razia Begum v. Hijrat Ali etc. PLJ 1976 SC 234.
Expectation of life Principle is not a rule of universal application. Acquittal of the accused on erroneous and perverse view does not prevent the appellate Court from imposing death sentence when the acquittal is likely to result in grave miscarriage of justice. (SC) PLJ 1975 SC 162 Nuran v. Nura etc. PLJ 1975 SC 170 Abdul Rashid v. Umaid Ali etc. (SC) PLJ 1978 SC 19 Mokha v. Zulfiqar.
Expectancy of life doctrine depends on facts and circumstances of each case Brutal and cold-blooded murders do not call for lesser penalty because of 4 years delay. PLD 1978 SC 10 Mokha v. Zulfiqar.
Expectancy of life. The Supreme Court has shifted its trend of awarding lesser penalty on the principle of expectancy of life because of chronic delay in proceedings to avoid gallows. (SC) PLD 1976 SC 452 Muhammad Sharif. PLJ 1976 SC 346.
Mitigation: Defence is to establish circumstances for the purpose of mitigation, yet the Court is also duty bound to consider the matter particularly where alternative punishment is death. (SC) 1969 P.Cr.LJ 1589 Said Amir Shah.
No mitigation when the act is cruel. Accused acquitted by High Court on 14-9-1972. Sentenced to death by Supreme Court on 10-5-1974. (SC) PLD 1974 SC 266 Abdus Sattar v. Muhammad Anwar.
Mitigating circumstance. The accused who had succeeded in casting some doubt on the version of prosecution case was entitled to benefit in the matter of sentence. Death sentence reduced to life imprisonment on two counts. Sentences to run concurrently. 1993 SCMR 1660, Ansar Ahmed Khan Burki.
Appellant fired only one shot and there was deep rooted enmity between the parties. Held, to be a mitigating circumstance. Death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. PLJ 1995 S.C. 684, Muhammad Arshad etc.
Accused given beating by the deceased over the utilization of pond water, considered a mitigating circumstances. Death sentence altered, to life imprisonment. 1999 SCMR 52 Muhammad Akram.
Only one kassi blow inflicted on head causing death. As the blow was not repeated; the act was without pre-medication and impulsive, death sentence was reduced life imprisonment, with benefit u/S. 382-B, Cr.P.C. (D) PLJ 1999 Cr.C. (Lah.) 626, Noor Muhammad.
Quarrel and scuffle before he occurrence when the accused demanded his money back from the deceased. The teenager accused felt highly offended when the deceased instead of returning the money abused the accused. Death sentence reduced to life imprisonment what benefit u/S. 382-B Cr.P.C. 1999 SCMR 406 Muhammad Ikram. PLJ 1999 SC 738
Branches of disputed tree were being cut by the deceased and complaint party. Appellant was provoked, death sentences reduced to life imprisonment. PLJ 1999 SC 732 Haider Shah.
Filthy abuses and youthfulness. Accused 17 years old smarting under filthy abuses of the deceased, running home, bringing a dagger and stabbing the deceased. No previous enmity or motive. Lesser penalty awarded and no fine under section 544-A, Cr.P.C. (DB) 1975 P.Cr.LJ 929 Muhammad Aslam.
Accused provoked by earlier scuffle immediately thereafter pursued and attacked the deceased. Death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. 1994 SCMR 92, Nazir Ahmed.
Sudden quarrel and death caused after exchange of abuses. Death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. 1983 SCMR 922 Rehmat Ali.
Possibility of use of strong language by the two deceased police officers and the accused reacting violently not excluded. Death sentence reduced to life imprison ment and conviction altered to Section 304 (1). (SC) PLD 1975 SC 275 Abdul Rehman. PLJ 1975 SC 250.
Abusive language does cause some provocation. Appellant a minor shot another student. Death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. 1982 SCMR 447 Javed Iqbal.
Use of abusive language by deceased. Death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. 1985 SCMR 838 Tufail Masih.
Abuses and filthy language used by the deceased. Death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. (DB) 1976 P.Cr.LJ 449 Muhammad Amin Shah.
Question of sentence, leave to appeal granted when material on record indicating exchange of abuses and shot being fired in the heat of the moment. 1983 SCMR 285.
Abuses hurled at accused. Deceased waylaid attacked 3 hours later. Death sentence reduced to transportation for life. (DB) PLD 1966 Dacca 508 Kaicha.
Father of the accused abused, held sufficient to boil blood of the accused. Transportation for life instead of death proper sentence. (DB) 1973 P.Cr.LJ 1052 Nabi Bux.
Abuse and assault held to be grave and sudden provocation. Offence altered from section 302 to 304 (1), PPC. Sentence reduced. (DB) 1972 P.Cr.LJ 1025 Mir Afzal.
Mere use of insulting words would not normally bring case within Exception 1 of Section 300, PPC. (DB) 1973 P.Cr.LJ 601 Ahmed Khan.
Exchange of hot words, single knife blow inflicted without premeditation. Appellant less than 18 years. Life imprisonment proper. (DB) 1973 P.Cr.LJ 398 Abdul Rashid.
Preceding tragedy resulting in death of two closest family members. Sudden occurrence. Accused an old man facing protracted trial. Sentence reduced to life imprisonment. 1977 P.Cr.LJ 735 Muhammad Umar.
Accused provoked the deceased who in retaliation abused the accused. Accused killed the deceased by 6 knife blows. Life sentence of the accused upheld. 1995 SCMR 1327, Shaukat Ali.
Exchange of abuses and fist blows preceding stabbing of deceased. Held, lesser punishment would meet the ends of justice. PLJ 1979 Cr.C. (Kar.) 62 Muhammad Nawaz.
Abuses. Deceased abusing accused in presence of latter's mother and wife. Accused losing temper and giving fatal blow to deceased. Sentence reduced from death to transportation. (DB) 1969 P.Cr.LJ 1241 Meenhal.
Abusive language does not amount to grave and sudden provocation but is provocation of a sort. Death sentence reduced to transportation for life. (DB) 1968 P.Cr.LJ 1567 Muhammad Azam. PLJ 1974 Cr.C. (Lah.) 283.
Shoe beating to an elderly mand and abusing womenfolk enough for grave and sudden provocation in the circumstances of the case. Sentence of life imprisonment u/S. 302, PPC reduced to 10 years' R.I. u/S. 304 (1), PPC. 1980 P.Cr.LJ 357 Abdul Aziz.
Abusing and pushing aside accused. 5 years' R.I. reduced to 2 years already undergone. Exceptions 1 and 4 of section 300, PPC considered. Deceased abusing and pushing aside accused, accused acting in the heat of the moment and giving single blow on head. 1968 P.Cr.LJ 1836 Said.
Abused by father, son shot him dead. Death sentence maintained. (SC) 1972 SCMR 161 Sodagar.
Abuses and fist blows preceding 3 knife blows killing the victim instantaneously. Death sentence reduced to transportation for life. (SC) 1972 SCMR 249 Muhammad Saleem.
Exchange of hot words appears to have taken place before the act of firing. Death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. PLD 1994 S.C. 641, Abid Hussain.
Strong language used on both sides accused acted on the impulse of the moment. Death sentence reduced to transportation for life. (DB) AIR 1935 Lah. 94 = 36 Cr.LJ 1335 Inayat Khan v. Emperor.
Filthy language. A young man killing his own father shortly after altercation in which deceased had used filthy language, Sentence reduced from death to transportation for life. (DB) PLD 1966 Pesh. 1 Farid Khan.
"Bastard" Deceased called appellant bastard. This did present an element of sudden provocation, though not grave. Death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. PLJ 1988 Cr.C. (Lah.) 365 Allah Rakha.
Deceased abused father of the accused petitioner just before occurrence. High Court held it to be a mitigating circumstance and reduced sentence to life imprisonment. Supreme Court refused to interfere. 1987 SCMR 1855 Abbas Ali.
Mitigating factors, for example are: extreme youth of accused, a young offender acting under the influence of or instigation of elders, sudden quarrel and want of premeditation, acting on impulse of the moment etc. (DB) 49 Cr.LJ 26 Gurdev Singh etc. v. Emp.
Mitigating circumstances and Supreme Court. Possibility of mitigating circumstance though not without substance the Supreme Court did not interfere as the sentence was legal. Held, the matter more appropriately feel to be dealt with by the executive in prerogative of mercy. (SC) 1976 SCMR 532 Feroz.
Mitigation: Dismissal from service. Accused a young man and Govt. servant liable to dismissal from service on conviction. Fact to be considered when assessing quantum of punishment. PLD 1963 Kar. 363 Abdul Hamid.
Mitigation. Amount embezzled a platry sum of Rs. 10. Accused a Govt. servant thrown out of employment because of conviction. Sentence reduced to already undergone. 1973 P.Cr.LJ 366 Muhammad Rafiq
Case of fraud, accused Government servant aged 56 years, loing pension, sentence reduced to already undergone. 1973 P.Cr.LJ 19 Sajjad Hussain Zaidi.
Amount of illegal gratification small. Amount involved only Rs. 25/- One year's R.I. reduced to 4 months. 1968 P.Cr.LJ 1273 Abdul Kader Talukdar.
DELAY IN CASES AND LONG DETENTION
Protracted trial and loss of service are no longer mitigating circumstances for awarding lenient sentence in bribery cases, PLJ 1987 SC 620 Malik Muhammad Khan.
Mitigation: Protracted trial. Government servant facing trial for 7 years and losing job. Sentence reduced to one year already undergone. 1977 P.Cr.LJ 67 Shamim Ahmad. 1976 P.Cr.LJ 873 Ghulam Farid etc.
Suffered ordeal of prosecution for 11 years, it was considered a mitigating circumstance. Sentence reduced to already undergone. PLJ 1989 Cr.C. (Kar.) 361. Muhammad Saleem.
Prolonged trial. (5 years) Plea that the accused had protracted trial and investigation lasting 5 years, threat of loss of job and the accused pleaded guilty because of persuasive suggestions of trial Judge. Held, plea not based on law. Sentence of 6 months' R.I. justified, specially in view of alarming increase in corruption. (SC) 1975 SCMR 244 Murtaza.
Long detention in prison is not a mitigating circumstance for the reduction of death sentence to life imprisonment, in a murder case. PLJ 1987 SC 413 Maqbool Ahmed.
Detention in condemned cell for 6 years, held, is not a mitigating circumstance. Death sentence maintained. 1987 SCMR 124 Muhammad Aman.
Occurrence took place 30 years before not a mitigating circumstance. Appellants ordered to surrender and undergo 3 years' R.I. for offence u/S. 409, PPC. NLR 1988 Cr. 635 Muhammad Ayub Butt etc.
Trial lasting for 6 years, held to be a mitigating circumstance, when the embezzled amount paid and the accused lost his job. Sentence reduced to 3 months already undergone. (DB) PLJ 1986 Cr.C. (Kar.) 9. M. Habibullah.
Trial lasting 12 years, Trial Court sentenced the accused to 1 years' R.I. and fine each u/Ss. 17 & 22 of the Emigration Ordinance, 1979. High Court reduced the sentence to already undergone in view of the protracted trial but fine was maintained. 1985 SCMR 180, Shahid alias Babu relied upon. PLJ 1995 Cr.C. (Lah.) 245, Ghulam Nabi.
Detention in death cell for about 10 years is not a ground for awarding lesser sentence. PLJ 1987 SC 481 Sultan. 1987 SCMR 1059 Maqbool Ahmed etc.
Justice delayed is justice denied. Revision petition heard after 11 years. Sentence reduced to period already undergone. PLJ 1978 Cr.C. (Lah.) 224. Ahmed Din.
Inordinate delay in trial of 6 years. Sentence of 3 montsh awarded instead of 2 years. PLD 1958 Kar. 312. A.A. General v. Muhammad Bashir Khan etc.
18 years old appellant suffered 9 years in imprisonment till decision of appeal. Death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. PLJ 1981 Cr.C. (Rwp.) 306 Muhammad Iqbal.
Mitigation. Revision petition against conviction of accused pending decision for about 5 years. Sentence already undergone and a fine of Rs. 200, held, would meet the ends of justice. 1970 P.Cr.LJ 668 Rajab Ali.
Occurrence 13 years old, family honour involved, acting under father's influence, death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. (SC) PLD 1976 SC 557 Noor Elahi v. Ch. Zafar-ul-Haque.
Long since occurrence and family honour. Occurrence in 1965. Appeal from acquittal in the Supreme Court heard in Dec., 1975. Motive alleged by the prosecution; liaison of the deceased with the sister of the accused. Held, death sentence not called for. Life imprisonment awarded. (SC) PLD 1976 SC 234, Taj Muhammad v. Muhammad Yousaf etc. 1978 P.Cr.LJ 1 Wazir etc.
Mitigation: Revision petition heard after 10 years, in a case under section 325/34, P.P.C. Sentence already undergone would meet the ends of justice. 1977 P. Cr.LJ 166, Shabbir.
Mitigation; conviction recorded 11 years ago, accident due to mechanical defect of the vehicle, accused a T.B.patient, sentence reduced to already undergone, 1977 P.Cr. LJ 932 Muhammad Akbar.
Migitation; revision heard after 11 years, accused settled in peaceful life and earned expectancy of liberty, sentence reduced to already undergone. 1977 P.Cr. LJ 934. Ahmed Din.
Mitigation-Delay in trial. Accused facing trial for murder for 4 years. Delay is mitigating circumstance for sentence under section 302, PPC. (DB) PLD 1959 Kar. 460 Kamber Ali Shah.
Mitigation-Delay in trial and appeal. Incident took place on 25-5-1964. High Court acquitted the accused on 8-11-1966. Supreme Court decided the appeal on 17-5-1973 and awarded life imprisonment instead of death because the incident took place as far back as 25th May, 1964. (SC) PLD 1973 SC 418 State v. Mushtaq.
Appeal heard after 5 years, fine instead of imprisonment, imposed; it was considered too late to send the accused to jail after 5 years when he had been on bail during that period. (SC) 1976 SCMR 354. Muhammad Munshi.
Delay in the trial. Prosecution continuing for 6 years. Sentence reduced to already undergone and fine also reduced. 1975 P.Cr.LJ 809. Muhammad Aslam etc.
Mitigation Protracted trial. Accused facing proceedings for offence under section 338, P.P.C. for years. Sentence of 6 months' R.I. reduced to already undergone but fine maintained. 1973 P.Cr.LJ 797 Abdul Hafeez.
Mitigation: Delay in trial. Offence committed 5 years ago. Accused underwent protracted trial. Sentence reduced to fine only. 1973 P.Cr.LJ 884 In re: Abdul Razak
Prolonged proceedings. Criminal prosecution dragging against the accused for 5 years 3 months' R.I. substituted by fine of Rs.50/- 1975 P.Cr. LJ 634 Atta Muhammad v. State Bank of Pakistan.
Protracted trial for 5 years. Case under sections 325,323/149, P.P.C. Incident occurred in March, 1969, convicted on 30.8.1972. High Court decided the appeal on 25th April, 1975. Sentence reduced to already undergone. (3 months 24 days) 1976 P.Cr.LJ 623 Choohar etc. 1976 P.Cr.LJ Zahir-ud-Din. PLD 1978 Lah. 962 Zahoor.
Protracted trial and investigation for 7 years faced by the accused under section 161, PPC read with Prevention of Corruption Act, II of 1947 section 5 (2) for bribe. He lost his job too. Sentence reduced to already undergone. 1976 P.Cr.LJ 668 Muhammad Muneer 1968 P. Cr. LJ 803 Umed Khan.
Prolonged custody before trial. Accused in custody for over 3 years before trial, sentenced to 3 years' R.I. under section 304 (1), PPC. (DB) 1975 P. Cr. LJ 820 Manzoor-ul-Haq etc.
Commutation of death sentence on ground of delay in execution is not a matter which should be taken into consideration by the Federal Court when the sentence is legal. (FC) PLD 1951 FC 142 Intizam Hussain v. Crown.
Delay in execution of death sentence. See delay in execution.
Abscondence for 10 years is not a mitigating circumstance that long time has elapsed since the occurrence. Death sentence upheld. (SC) 1968 SCMR 1240.Ibrahim.
Incident took place 12 years before end of trial, held, is an extenuating factor, and there being no motive death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. NLR 1985 Cr. 299, Muhammad Hussain.
Old occurrence. Magistrate ordering detention for 3 years, occurrence being as old as 12 years. Supreme Court reduced the sentence to already undergone (7 months). (SC) PLD 1974 SC 46. State v. Muhammad Yusuf.
Appeal being heard after 12 years. Sentence of imprisonment for 2 years reduced to already undergone. 1990 SCMR 320. Jan Muhammad.
No mitigation: Delay in hearing of appeal. Fact that more than 4-1/2 years elapse in disposal of appeal filed by convict is not a mitigating circumstance and the Court cannot recommend commutation of the sentence. (SC) PLD 1973 SC 332 Shah Muhammad.
Mere delay in decision (Murder on 25-3-1972; appeal in Supreme Court decided on 17-2-81) of the case does not entitle the convict to lesser penalty for murder. PLJ 1983 SC 155. Abdul Rashid.
No mitigation; for delay in trial and appeal. Mere length of time taken in concluding trial and deciding appeal is not by itself extenuating circumstance justifying imposition of lesser penalty. (SC) 1973 SCMR 162 Samano (SC) 1973 SCMR 344. Muhammad Hussain, Contra PLD 1973 SC 418 State v. Mushtaq.
10 years interval between previous convictions, enhanced punishment under section 75, PPC should not be awarded, 7 Cr. LJ 293 Kasim Ali v. Emperor.
Mitigation: accused on bail. High Court enhanced the sentence to 10 years. Supreme Court held that the appellant had hardly any reason to complain against the High Court order, but as he had been released on bail by the Supreme Court 5 years before, his sentence was reduced to already undergone and fine of Rs. 2,000/- was imposed. (SC) 1977 SCMR 33. Arif Shah.
Punishment u/S. 302, PPC according to Sindh Children Act, 1955, when a boy under 16 years of age committed murder and on the date of conviction he was just over 18 years, held, he could not be sentenced to death or life imprisonment or any term of imprisonment as he had crossed the age of 18 years but fine can be imposed on him as he was over 14 years but no imprisonment in default of payment of fine could be ordered. PLJ 1996 Cr. C. (Kar) 550, Papoo alias Abdul Karim.
Young man killing his paternal uncle in retaliation of assault made shortly before occurrence on father of the accused by son of the deceased. Death sentence reduced to transportation for life. (SC) 1972 SCMR 669 Haider Zaman.
Recovery of klashnikov, accused being teenager sentence reduced from 7 years to 5 years' R.I. (DB) 1992 P. Cr. LJ 324. Nasrullah Khan.
Accused 14 years of age at the time of murder considered a mitigating factor, sentence of life imprisonment not enhanced. (DB) PLD 1989 Pesh. 237, Johar Din.
Accused less than 17 at the time of occurrence and he suspected that the deceased had illicit relations with his paternal aunt, held, High Court had rightly maintained life sentence. 1991 SCMR 1406 Abdul Ghafoor v. Jamil Ahmed.
Young man of 19-20 years murdering his own brother because deceased admonished him for being addicted to narcotics. Held, death sentence proper.(SC) 1973 SCMR 324 Muhammad Khursheed.
Extreme Youth. 15 years old accused given lesser sentence for murder on account of extreme youth. (DB) 1976 P. Cr. LJ 296 Azhar Hussain 1976 P. Cr. LJ 326 Abdul Majid.
Accused 16 years of age. School certificate showing the date of birth of the accused not duly proved, hence rejected. Held, the age of the accused justified the original sentence of life imprisonment. (SC) PLD 1976 SC 568. Muhammad Afzal.
Minor at the time of occurrence is not liable to Qisas and the case is not covered by clause (a) of Sec. 302, PPC. The accused was provoked because half an hour before the occurrence son of the deceased on the exhortation of the deceased had injured a brother of the accused. Even though provocation was not grave and sudden but subsisting as a fact brought the case u/S. 302(c), PPC. Death sentence reduced to 14 years imprisonment. 1999 SCMR 837, Muhammad Mumtaz Khan.
Accused being teenager at the time of recovery of Klashnikov sentence reduced to 5 years from 7 years, with benefit u/S. 382-B, Cr. P.C. 1992 P. Cr. LJ.
161/2 old son committing murder on the lalkara of father. Lesser sentence awarded. PLJ 1999 SC 1001 Muhammad Riaz etc.
Appellant a young man of 18 years at the time of occurrence, he gave only a single stab wound to deceased. Motive for the murder not proved. Death sentence reduced to life-imprisonment (DB) PLJ 1996 Cr.C. (Lah.) 36, Muhammad Hayat.
Accused young man of 20 who had just entered into realities of life. Death sentence reduced to life imprisonment in the circumstances of the case. (DB) PLD 1995 Kar. 112, Wazir Gul.
Mitigation: Appellant only 18 years and only two days before the girl whom he wanted to be his wife had been given in marriage to another man; accused had given only one stab below and mystery existed as to why the accused did not attack the person against whom he had direct motive. Death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. PLD 1996 Lah. 279, Muhammad Hayat.
Age of the accused by appearance 16/17 years recorded by trial Court while recording his statement u/Ss. 340 & 342 Cr. P.C. Record showed that the accused was 21 years and 8 months old at the time of occurrence. Supreme Court giving benefit of discrepancy, to the accused reduced his sentence to life imprisonment. 1993 SCMR 2377, Sohail Iqbal.
Accused young and not previous convicts, sentence u/S. 395 PPC and sec. 20 of Hudood Ord. VI of 1979 reduced from life imprisonment to 10 years' R.I. 1992 SCMR 338, Murid Abbas etc.
70 years old accused of cruel double murder. Old age alone not a mitigating circumstance. Death sentence maintained. 1981 SCMR 182 Amir Gul.
Accused 75 years old, convicted for cheating. Imprisonment till the rising of the Court and fine of one thousand rupees held, sufficient. (DB) 1975 P.Cr.LJ 1184. State v. Muhammad Din.
80 years old accused and infirm, lesser sentence of life imprisonment would meet the ends of justice. (DB) PLD 1975 Lah. 1418 Bodhi etc.
80 years age held to be an extenuating circumstance for offence u/S. 302, PPC and sentence of life imprisonment not enhanced. (DB) PLJ 1993 Cr. C. (Pesh.) 278, Muhammad Aslam Shah.
Old and infirm accused: aged 70 years with T.B. Death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. (DB) 1979 P.Cr.LJ 275 Muhammad Ibrahim.
Mitigation. 17 years sold accused smarting because of abuses to his brother-in-law and maltreatment of his mother. Death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. (DB) PLD 1977 Kar. 75. Muhammad Saleem. PLJ 1977 Kar. 136.
16 years old at the time of occurrence, death sentence reduced to life imprisonment in view of youthful age. PLJ 1981 Cr. (Lah.) 296 Nasir Javaid etc.
Sodomy. Accused of tender age and protracted trial, including appeal and revision. Sentence reduced to one week already undergone. 1978 P. Cr. LJ 639 Ali Khan v. Manzoor Hussain.
Sodomy, appellant aged 14 at the time of occurrence, 8 years' R.I. reduced to 3 years. PLJ 1988 Cr.C. (Lah.) 273 Rab Nawaz.
Accused less than 16 years at the time of occurrence, death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. (DB) NLR 1988 Cr. 452. Muhammad Jameel etc.
Merely because the accused was of tender age would not mean that he should not be given capital punishment. 1995 SCMR 1668, Zulfikar alias Bhutto = PLJ 1995 SC 651,
Tender age. (16 years) and sudden occurrence calls for lesser punishment for murder. (SC) NLR 1985 Cr. 777 Zainab Bibi v. Mushtaq etc.
Old age, no reduction of sentence. Appellant 70/75 years old. Death sentence maintained as the murder was cold and calculated. 1983 SCMR 2070. Pir Bakhsh.
14 years old occurrence and acting under influence of father, conviction maintained but sentence reduced to life imprisonment. 1988 SCMR 1640. Noor Muhammad.
Mitigation. Sons acting under the influence of father, who alone had the motive to kill. Life imprisonment awarded by the High Court on that ground not enhanced by the Supreme Court. (SC) 1976 SCMR 128 Mst.Hayat Bibi v. Muhammad Khan etc.
Possibility that the accused obeyed their father in committing the crime of murder could not be ruled out, death sentence altered to life imprisonment by High Court not interfered by the Supreme Court. 1995 SCMR 256, Mst. Hafizan Bibi v. Muhammad Tufail and others.
Murder committed under influence of father who raised lalkara, held, a mitigating circumstances. Death sentence reduced to life imprisonment with benefit u/S. 382-B, Cr.P.C. 1999 SCMR 396 Nazeer Ahmed.
Under father's influence. No direct evidence of commission of crime available against the accused. Possibility existing that he acted under the influence of his father. Sentence reduced to life imprisonment. 1985 SCMR 479. Hussain etc.
Lalkara by father to his son to kill the deceased. The appellant fired with his revolver injuring the deceased who died later on. The appellant appeared to have acted under the influence of his father. Death sentence converted into life imprisonment with benefit u/S. 382-B, Cr.P.C. PLJ 1999 SC 241 Nazeer Ahmed.
Acting under the influence of mother's and sister's exhortation and committing murder, death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. 1995 SCMR 168, Tariq and two others.
Murdering under influence of mother. Death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. NLR 1981 Cr. 60 Shaukat.
Acting under the influence of father-in-law, held, a mitigating circumstance, death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. (DB) NLR 1987 Cr. 636 Mehar Khan.
Acting under the influence of uncle, a 20 years sold accused, life sentence held, proper sentence. (DB) 47 Cr. LJ Wali Dad etc. v. Crown AIR 1946 Lah. 229.
Accused 21 years old and acting under influence of uncles and not playing leading role, considered a mitigating factor. Death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. 1985 SCMR 854. Ballia etc.
Acting under influence of uncle, a co-accused and being only 15 years of age at the time of occurrence, death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. (DB) NLR 1987 Cr. 642, Sana Ullah etc.
Accused acting under the influence of elder brother, aged only 14 or 15 years and having no direct motive, occurrence being sudden. Sentence reduced to life imprisonment, on two counts. Sentences to run concurrently. 1987 SCMR 967. Tariq Pervaiz etc. (DB) 1992 P.Cr. LJ 290 Amjad.
Helping elder brother in attempted abduction and having no direct motive for offence. Accused in jail for over 1-1/2 year. Sentence reduced to already suffered under section 366, P.P.C. (DB) 1975 P.Cr.LJ 301 Fateh Muhammad etc.
Influence of elder brother: Four murders committed by five brothers as their sister had been insulted. Death sentence maintained for 2 elder brothers while sentences of 3 brothers who were 26, 25 and 20 years reduced to life imprisonment with benefit of Sec. 382-B. Cr. P.C. 1985 SCMR 1415. Liaquat Shah etc.
Accused 14/15 years old who might have acted under the influence of his elder brother. Sentence of life imprisonment not enhanced. 1993 SCMR 944. Muhammad Altaf v. Muzaffar Hussain etc.
Chances of accused having acted under influence of elder brother not ruled out. Death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. 1992 SCMR 357. Khuda Yar etc.
Influence of elder brother: It is possible that the appellant might have acted under the influence of his elder brother, hence death sentence altered to transportation for life under section 302/34. (SC) 1970 SCMR 220. Muhammad Nawaz.
And being under agony of death sentence for about 2 years, lesser sentence of transportation for life awarded instead of death. (SC) PLD 1970 SC 447 Shaheb Ali.
Younger brother possibly acted under the influence of elder brothers. Death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. 1985 SCMR 423 Mushtaq Ahmed. PLJ 1985 SC 135.
Boy of 17 in company of other relatives committing murder. Transportation for life held, proper sentence. (DB) 42 Cr.LJ 614 Moghar Singh etc.
Accused acting under influence of elder brother awarded lesser sentence u/S. 302, PPC. NLR 1988 Cr. 368 Hanif etc.
Under the influence of grandfather, the appellant, a young man firing at the deceased was given lesser sentence of life imprisonment. 1993 SCMR 155, Zia Ullah.
FAMILY HONOUR AND PROVOCATION
Accused given beating by complainant party and were being tried u/S. 307, PPC. The complainant party were acquitted on the day of occurrence. Accused took law into their own hands to get even with the complainant party. One of the complainant party killed. Held, lesser penalty would meet the ends of justice. PLD 1988 SC 274. Muhammad Akbar v. Muhammad Khan = PLJ 1988 SC 282.
Avenging father's murder is a mitigating ground. Natural witnesses close relatives of decease, unsafe to accept testimony of such witnesses without corroboration. (DB) PLJ 1980 Cr. C. (Lah.) 91 Yaqub etc.
Murder committed to avenge father's murder not considered a mitigating circumstance. Life imprisonment enhanced to death. (DB) PLD 1978 Pesh. 97. Niaz Muhammad.
Avenging father's murder. Tradition and family duty in the Punjab. Sentence of death reduced to transportation for life. (DB) PLJ 1973 Lah. 252 Zulfiqar. 1974 P. Cr. LJ 100 = (DB) PLJ 1980 Cr. C. (Lah.) 484. Khalid Farooq.
Avenging death of father by murdering brother of alleged killer of father of the accused. Not a mitigating circumstance. Death sentence proper. (SC) 1973 SCMR 39 Abdul Ghaffar.
Murder to avenge father's murder 12/13 years before. Sentence reduced to life imprisonment. PLJ 1985 SC 448. Muhammad Aslam.
Family feud and honour. Murder committed to avenge feud cannot always be regarded as a mitigating circumstance of awarding lesser penalty. (SC) PLD 1978 SC 10, Mokha v. Zulfiqar etc.
To avenge the death of father and brother murder committed out of sense of family honour. Transportation for life proper. (SC) PLD 1967 SC 185 Ajun Shah.
Deceased gave shoe-beating to appellant's father on night preceding the day of occurrence, held, a mitigating circumstance. Death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. (DB) PLJ 1988 Cr. C. (Lah.) 263 Nasar Ullah.
Provocation by uncle asking accused not to come to his house as he was a proclaimed offender considered by the Supreme Court and sentence reduced to life imprisonment. 1991 SCMR 1590 Zar Wali Shah.
Insult and provocation: is overpoweringly important to agricultural tribes of Western region. Notice could appropriately be taken of such a question in awarding sentence. Held, death sentence not called for in matters involving family honour. (SC) 1975 SCMR 185 Muhammad Din.
Murder committed on seeing the deceased flagrant delicto with his sister. Killed both. Held, Offence u/S. 302(c) PPC. Sentence reduced to 10 years R.I. and fine. (DB) PLJ 1998 Cr.C. (Lah.) 205, Barkat Ali.
Deceased publicly insulted and slapped the accused on the night proceeding the day of occurrence. Held, a case of lesser sentence made out. PLJ 1991 Cr. C. (Lah.) 132. Aziz Masih.
Appellants publicly insulted by deceased, held, to be an extenuating factor. Sentence reduced to life. imprisonment. (DB) PLJ 1985 Cr. C. (Lah.) 345. Khakhi Jan etc.
Provocation by insult in village panchait by deceased abusing and slapping the appellant. Sentence of death reduced to life imprisonment. NLR 1984 Cr. 616. Abdul Sattar.
Slapping earlier considered a mitigating circumstance. Death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. 1984 SCMR 832. Abdus Sattar.
Accused manhandled immediately before occurrence, smarting under and provoked by it. A mitigating circumstance. Death sentence reduced to transportation for life (DB) 1970 P.Cr.LJ 1330 Muhammad Hussain etc.
Humiliating accusations, abuses and sudden flare up are mitigating circumstances not calling for extreme penalty. 1979 SCMR 210 Sher Muhammad v. Muhammad Hayat.
Humiliation of appellant. Appellant humiliated by beating on buttocks while naked in presence of women. Honour injured. Life imprisonment instead of death proper sentence. (DB) PLJ 1973 Lah. 444 Muhammad Aslam.
Indication of some serious provocation existing though appellant failed to prove grave and sudden provocation. Death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. 1981 SCMR 856 Muhammad Ashraf.
Where the provocation is grave but not sudden as it is in the cases of exceeding the right of private defence lesser sentence instead of death is justified notwithstanding previous feelings of revenge. PLD 1991 SC 1059 Ghulam Abbas v. Muzhar Abbas.
Provocation sudden but not grave, death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. (DB) NLR 1990 Cr. 274 Nisar Ahmed.
Insult, provocation causing temporary imbalance of mind. When 2 murders committed, held life imprisonment proper. (DB) PLJ 1982 Cr. C. (Kar.) 157, Khadam Hussain.
Benefit of romote possibility of provocative act by deceased existing which prompted the accused to go armed with a gun and fire at the deceased fatally, held, had rightly been given to the accused and sentence of life imprisonment was sufficient to meet the ends of justice. 1990 SCMR 595. Zafar Ali.
Deceased giving provocation to accused by throwing earth on their land and when objected to resorted to abuse. Held, a mitigating circumstance, death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. (DB) 1975 P. Cr. LJ 116 Beer Din etc.
Father of the accused given shoe-beating by P.W., accused fired single gunshot to avenge the disgrace and killing the deceased. Sentence reduced to life imprisonment. (DB) 1975 P. Cr. LJ 164 Muhammad Ishaq etc.
Removal of Chaddar from the head of the mother of the accused, by the deceased, held it is an incidence calling for lesser punishment. Death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. (DB) PLJ 1993 Cr.C. (Lah.) 354 Muhammad Ramzan etc.
Possibility of element of provocation which prompted the appellant to inflict fatal injuries to deceased existing due to exchange of hot words. No premeditation. Appellant 22 years old. Lesser sentence by trial Court upheld. PLJ 1990 Cr.C. (Pesh.) 130 Umar Hayat.
Element of provocation in a murder case justifies lesser sentence. Deceased who was engaged to be married with the appellant was done to death as her parents had broken the engagement. NLR 1990 Cr. 530 Niamat Ali.
Sustained provocation and failure to prove motive are mitigating circumstances entitling the appellant to lesser penalty. (DB) NLR 1989 Cr. 151 Lal etc.
Misdeeds of deceased causing utter frustration to the accused party merited reduction of death sentence to life imprisonment. (DB) NLR 1991 Cr. 89. Muhammad Ashraf.
Dishonouring mother of accused by deceased, lesser sentence awarded instead of death. (DB) 1987 Cr.C. 311. Muhammad Iqbal.
Deceased making gestures to the sister of the accused from his roof caused occurrence of murder. Held, lesser sentence of murder justified. (SC) NR 1985 Cr. 766 Muhammad Iqbal v. Muhammad Tahir.
Family honour; when sister married against the wishes of the family she was murdered by brother. Death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. (DB) NLR 1988 Cr. 594 Mulazim Hussain etc.
Family honour involved, held, as the prosecution case itself was that murder was committed for family honour therefore the case was of lesser sentence of life imprisonment. 1987 SCMR 1864 Muhammad Afzal.
Sentence u/S. 302(c), PPC reduced to 5 years R.I. On account of the question of family honour and the age of the accused 19/20 years. PLJ 1998 Cr.C. (Lah.) 338 Muhammad Ayub
For abduction of one girl 6 persons killed when the complainant party refused to return the abductee. There was background of previous enmity as well. Death sentence of 6 persons reduced to life imprisonment. 1985 PSC 517 Muhammad Sher etc.
Cousin of the murderer of uncle killed after 20 days of the occurrence, to avenge the murder of the uncle. Death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. 1985 SCMR 625 Muhammad Din.
Sentence u/S. 302(c) PPC reduced to 5 years R.I. on account of age of 19/20 years of the accused and question of family honour being involved. PLJ 1998 Cr.C. (Lah.) 338, Muhammad Ayub.
Family honour and co-accused. Accused 21 years old, smarting under insult and provocation, killing deceased out of sheer sense of vindication of self-respect. Death sentence reduced to transportation for life. (DB) 1970 P.Cr.LJ 1056 Muhammad Akhtar.
Family honour touching females. Co-accused murdered unarmed brother of the deceased who had done nothing to provoke the sense of family honour or given any offence at the time of the incident. No mitigating circumstance, death sentence upheld. (SC) 1976 SCMR 185 Muhammad Din.
Grave & sudden provocation. Accused killed wife and her paramour seeing them in compromising position. Supreme Court sentenced the accused to sentence of (5 years) already undergone under section 304 (1), PPC. PLD 1977 SC 153 Kamal. PLJ 1977 SC 132.
Under grave and sudden provocation the appellant killed both lovers on finding them in pari-delicto position. Sentence u/S. 302 (c), PPC reduced from 10 years' to 4 years' R.I. PLJ 1996 Cr.C. (Lah.) 651, Inam Ullah and another.
Mitigation. Provocation but not grave and sudden entitled the appellant to the lesser penalty of life imprisonment. 1976 SCMR 138 Karamat Ali.
Patricide. Father debarred the accused from inheritance. Death sentence reduced to life imprisonment, in view of the background of family relationship. (DB) PLD 1976 Lah. 68 Liaqat Ali.
Mitigating factor. Altercation between accused (husband) and deceased (wife) taking place before incident, held, a mitigating factor for awarding lesser penalty. (DB) 1970 P.Cr. LJ 1164 Abdul Aziz.
Continuous provocation caused by chopping off nose of grandmother of accused by deceased, held, a mitigating circumstance. Death sentence reduced to lesser punishment. 1988 SCMR 1502. Manzoor Hussain.
Vindication of amily honour death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. 1983 SCMR 322 Allah Ditta.
Family honour, mitigation: Wife and infant murdered out of suspicion of immorality. Held, death sentence not proper. NLR 1984 Cr. 7 Mst. Fazal Bibi etc. v. Muhammad Rafiq.
Mitigation; Accused murdered his wife, for having illicit connection with paramour, sentence reduced from death to life imprisonment. (SC) 1982 PSC 1482 Allah Wasaya.
Mitigation-Suspicion about the fidelity of wife. Appellant suspected that because of illicit relations the deceased wife was not willing to live with him. Held, extenuating circumstance. Death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. (DB) PLJ 1975 Cr. C. (Lah.) 121 Faiz Muhammad.
Refusal to return wife to the appellant by the deceased, although there was some gap between refusal and occurrence, yet it was held to be a mitigating circumstance. Death sentence reduced to life imprisonment (DB) PLJ 1974 Cr.C. (Lah,) 474 Qamar Ali.
Wife and paramour killed under Grave and sudden provocation average sentence is 3 years' R.I.-- See Grave and Sudden Provocation.
Wife of loose moral character giving birth to an illegitimate child and congratulated by co-villagers. Accused killed wife. Transportation for life instead of death proper sentence. (DB) AIR 1938 Lah. 556 Kartar Singh v. Emperor.
Brooding over infidel and objectionable conduct of wife and suffering torture for some time and killing her. Death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. 1980 P.Cr.LJ 1267, Ghulam Ali. PLJ 1980 Cr.C. (Kar.) 396.
Wife's infidelity. Brooding over wife's infidelity and then killing her. Sentence reduced to transportation. (DB) PLD 1960 Lah. 359 Khan Muhammad.
Motive; continuance of illicit intercourse, lesser sentence should be awarded. PLJ 1982 SC 337 Allah Wasaya.
Murder committed due to illicit relations of cousin of appellant with deceased. Sentence reduced from life imprisonment to 10 years' R.I. (DB). PLJ 1995 Cr.C. (Q) 388 Dur Muhammad.
When the accused is provoked and he loses self-control, the number and the nature of injuries lose significance when awarding sentence. 42 Cr. LJ 755 Emp. v. Mendi Ali.
Death sentence proper; family honour not involved. One accused himself molesting deceased's daughter 4/5 years back and deceased's son having molested accused's wife in relation. Family honour if at all involved, accused should have sought revenge much earlier against the person who molested his wife. Accused fired at unarmed deceased, without warning without provocation in cruel and cowardly manner. Death sentence maintained. (SC) 1972 SCMR 657 Rustam Khan
Sense of honour. Accused a young man with college education beaten with a stick in the presence of women. His chaddar falling down and becoming naked but violence continuing. Murder of such aggressor an act from sense of honour. Sentence reduced to the life imprisonment (DB). 1975 P. Cr. LJ 1083 Muhammad Aslam.
A girl taken, as sister seen in company of a stranger at odd hours of night held, observations contained in PLD 1965 SC 366 applied equally to the case. 1979 SCMR 48 Zulfikar v. Ramzan.
Family honour: sister of appellant not restored by brother of deceased. Sentence reduced to transportation for life. The trial Court could then award transportation of life and not life imprisonment. PLJ 1981 SC 622 Boota.
3 Murders but the sentence reduced to life imprisonment, because the murders had been committed to avenge the family disgrace; abduction of a female relative and her elopement 3 years ago. PLJ 1996 Cr. C. (Lah.) 72, Muhammad Sharif etc.
Family honour involving females: death sentence not called for. Sentence reduced. PLJ 1981 SC 563 Nazir Ahmad v. Muhammad Din etc.
Friends and family honour. Accused a friend of co-accused who joined in murder for the sake of family honour should also be given lesser sentence. As friend's sister is treated as ones own sister. PLJ 1979 Cr. C. (Lah.) 122 Muhammad Younus etc.
Deceased had hand in murder of father of accused. Accused smarting under the grievance. Sentence of death reduced to life imprisonment. (DB) 1980 P. Cr. LJ 556 Yaqub etc.
Family honour motive 5/6 years old, held, once it is admitted that the offence was the outcome of outraging the modesty of women, molestingg or dishonouring the womenfolk the accused earns an advantage of lesser penalty. 1989 SCMR 165 Abdul Rashid.
Family honour. 7 years' R.I. reduced to sentence already undergone 3-1/2 years under section 326/34, PPC complainant responsible for bringing everlasting family dishonour by having sexual intercourse with mother of one of the accused. Accused throughout a period of 4 to 5 years smarting under provocation and on getting a chance chopping off nose and one ear of the complainant to avenge dishonour. 1968 P.Cr.LJ 1921 Muhammad Ashraf.
Where crime committed (murder) for the vindication of family honour, transportation of life awarded instead of death. (SC) PLD 1966 SC 129 Muhammad Ramzan. (DB) 1978 P.Cr. LJ 354 Manzoor.
Deceased's brother abducted sister of appellant and request of appellant to deceased for restoration not receiving attention. Appellant in desperation murdering deceased. Death sentence reduced to lesser penalty. PLD 1981 SC 196 Boota.
Abduction of sister of one of the accused. Sense of family honour. Accused sentenced 1-1/2 year ago to transportation. Transportation for life proper sentence. (SC) PLD 1965 SC 363 Ghulam Rasul v. Ali Akbar.
Sister-in-law abducted, and not returned. Murder committed for family honour more than 3 years ago. Transportation for life proper sentence. (SC) PLD 1964 SC 54 Fazal Khan. PLJ 1983 SC 37 Allah Ditta.
Murder committed to avenge insult to wife of accused's brother. Lesser penalty of transportation for life awarded. (DB) 1973 P.Cr.LJ 40 Safdar.
Sister and her paramour murdered as they were suspected of illicit relations. Death sentence reduced to life imprisonment (SC) 1974 SCMR 485 Khuda Dad etc. (DB) 1974 P.Cr. LJ 391 Muhammad Rafiq etc.
Offence under section 326/34, PPC. Sentence reduced. PLJ 1976 Lah. 792 Jamma etc.
Double murder of his sister and paramour finding them in compromising position. Appellant sentenced to 5 years' R.I. u/S. 304 Part I, PPC. PLJ 1996 Cr. C. (Lah.) 2065, Maqsood Ahmed.
Sister and paramour killed. Death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. (DB) 1976 P. Cr. LJ 502 Allah Rakha.
Deceased murdered because of illicit relations with sister of the accused. Death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. (DB) NLR 1991 Cr. 239. Muhammad Iqbal.
Deceased made advances towards the sister of the accused on previous occasions. Accused resented and murdered the accused. Death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. (DB) 1976 P. Cr. LJ 227 Javid. 1977 SCMR 518 Muhammad Shafi v. Aziz Ahmed.
Murder committed for family honour as deceased's brother had abducted the sister of the accused and the deceased had quarrelled with the accused a day before. Death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. PLD 1997 SC 273, Allah Yar.
Cases involving family honour touching females do not call for death sentence. 1981 SCMR 422 Muhammad Younas. 1982 SCMR 1049 Ahmed.
Illicit connection with accused's sister by the deceased. Held, accused entitled to leniency. Transportation for life sentence not enhanced. (DB) PLJ 1973 Lah. 257 Muhammad Rafiq.
Family honour: avenging sisters abduction. Murder after 3 years. Death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. (DB) PLJ 1975 Cr. C. (Lah.) 396 Muhammad Rafiq.
Fault lay with deceased, which resulted in his murder. Death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. (DB) NLR 1988 Cr. 603 Muhammad Iqbal.
SUDDEN AND UNPREMEDITATED
Murder without premeditation in heat of moment, held, transportation for life instead of death proper sentence, specially when only one blow given. (SC) 1971 SCMR 647 Fazal Elahi v. Ali Azmat. (SC) Contra PLD 1963 SC 285 Dost Muhammad.
Sudden flare up. No previous enmity between the parties. Appellants had no pre-design or plan to kill the deceased. Death of the deceased was result of sudden flare up. Death sentence reduced to lie imprisonment. (DB) PLJ 1988 Cr.C. (Lah.) 20, Muhammad Arshad.
Sudden occurrence, chance meeting, no premeditation. Death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. 1989 SCMR 151. Ijaz Ahmed.
Occurrence of murder at the spur of the moment following hooliganism, heat of passion due to election activity. Death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. (DB) PLJ 1996 Cr.C. (Lah.) 392, Nausher.
3 Murders in heat of moment, When there was exchange of abuses and throwing of clods of earth on the accused sentence reduced to life imprisonment on each count. Sentences to run concurrently. 1984 SCMR 887. Ghulam Haider.
Murder not pre-planned. Accused admitting to have caused injuries to the deceased but pleading to have done so in self-defence. Plea of self-defence not proved. Accused had no enmity or motive to kill the deceased. Possibility of deceased having said or done something before he was fatally assaulted not excluded. Death sentence reduced to transportation for life. (DB) 1971 P. Cr. LJ 530 Muhammad Latif etc.
Unpremeditated murder at spur of moment entitles accused to lesser sentence for murder. (DB) NLR 1988 Cr. 490 Ghulam Muhammad.
Free fight. Both parties attacking and injuring each other. One killed. Death sentence reduced to transportation for life. (DB) 1970 P. Cr. LJ 1257 Bostan etc.
Free fight, death sentence not justified where one of the accused was also injured. (DB) NLR 1991 Cr. 49 Walayat Ali Shah.
No individual injury grievous. Incident sudden, wife quarrel-some, no individual injury grievous, appellant father of small children. Death commuted to transportation for life. (SC) 1971 SCMR 364 Ali Asghar.
No enmity with deceased and sudden occurrence is a mitigating circumstance. Lesser punishment awarded. (DB) NLR 1985 Cr. 703 Noor Ahmed etc.
Free fight, accused party also injured, double murder, lesser sentence of life imprisonment awarded in view of fire-arm and sharp-edged weapons injuries on the companions of the appellants. (DB) PLJ 1988 Cr. C. (Lah.) 425 Zafar Ali etc.
Killing on spur of the moment without premeditation or motive. Death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. (DB) 1975 P. Cr. LJ 1088 Haji etc.
Sudden flare up, with no direct enmity between the appellant and the deceased. Death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. (DB) PLJ 1976 Lah. 144. Hidayat Ullah etc.
Sudden flare up, unpremeditated attack: Accused fired and killed empty handed deceased. Held, offence u/S. 302, PPC, but lesser sentence Justified because of sudden flare up. 1989 SCMR 901. Mst. Akbar Jan v. Shahzad etc.
Sudden flare up would not call for capital sentence, even though accused acted harshly. (DB) NLR 1991 Cr. 163 Nazir Ahmed etc.
Mitigation: Sudden quarrel and grappling, two knife blows given by the appellant, Held, life imprisonment instead of death would meet the ends of justice. (DB) 1976 P.Cr. LJ 815 Mubarik Ali. (SC) PLJ 1983 SC 25. (Khuda Bakhsh).
Offence committed on the spur of the moment, no enmity. Only one injury inflicted on left upper neck with chhuri. Death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. (DB) 1976 P.Cr. LJ 172 Sabir Ali.
Sudden quarrel and attack without premeditation. Lesser sentence passed instead of death. (DB) 1976 P.Cr. LJ 339 Muhammad Akram.
Mitigation; old blood feud. Revenge for brother's murder, death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. (DB) 1976 P.Cr. LJ 1028 Shera etc.
Murder under desperate condition when accused was completely upset and sick of life. Death sentence reduced to transportation for life. (DB) PLD 1976 Kar. 579 Baloo.
Mitigating circumstances. Accused succeeding in casting some doubt on the version of promotion case was held to be entitled to benefit in matter of sentence. Events preceding the occurrence might have genuinely created an impression in the mind of the accused that the deceased was responsible for ruining the matrimonial life of his niece whom he had brought up as his daughter and constantly inflicted indignation on his family supported by other deceased. The provocation was not sudden but was constant depriving the accused of his power of self-control. Death sentence awarded by High Court on both counts was reduced to life imprisonment with order to run concurrently. 1993 SCMR 16630, Ansar Ahmed Khan Burki.
Deceased found taking law into his own hands. Death sentence of accused reduced to transportation for life. (SC) PLD 1970 212 Sardarai.
Driven to murder by circumstances and not by evil or reckless disposition or bad motive. No premeditation or pre-arrangement but accused losing balance of mind and under sudden impulse committing murder in moment of extreme excitement. Death sentence reduced to transportation for life. (DB) 1968 P.Cr. LJ 1979 Naeem Akhtar.
Accused driven to commit murder in a moment of extreme excitement and not by his evil or reckless disposition or bad motive but on account of misconduct of deceased. Death sentence reduced to transportation for life. (DB) 1971 P.Cr. LJ 292 Adil.
Firing in heat of moment. When both the parties had arms for their safety. Death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. PLJ 1981 SC 443 Ilahi Bukhsh v. Muhammad Siddiq etc.
Shooting on sudden impulse killing his wife, who refused to live with him. Death sentence refused to life imprisonment. (DB) PLJ 1982 Cr. C. (Rwp.) 475 Muhammad Iqbal.
Sudden quarrel in which accused fired only once at the deceased. Death sentence reduced to transportation for life. (SC) 1973 SCMR 512 Ahmed Din etc.
Sentence u/S. 304 (II): when no intention to kill; sudden fight; no previous enmity, conviction altered from Sec. 302 to 304 (II) and sentence of life imprisonment reduced to 7 years R.I. N.L.R 1984 Cr. 557. Boota.
Sudden occurrence-no pre-planning. Death sentence is not justified. Life sentence passed. (DB) PLJ 1974 Cr. C. (Lah.) 469 Ghulam Muhammad.
Age of convict 18/19 years & sudden occurrence, Supreme Court upheld, sentence of life imprisonment. PLJ 1985 SC 455. Mst. Zainab Bibi v. Mushtaq etc.
Sudden fight and altercation. Mere fact of encounter being sudden and killing done after an altercation, held, no justification for imposition of lesser sentence. (SC) 1974 SCMR 344 Ayub Khan etc v. State.
Mitigation-without premeditation and under influence of principal offender two co-accused took part in murderous assault. Death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. (SC) PLD 1977 SC 14 Siraj-ud-Din v. Misbah-ul-Islam. PLJ 1977 SC 28.
Impulsive act without premeditation, when wife of the appellant refused to accompany him to his house, he fired at her which resulted in her death. Death sentence reduced to life imprisonment with benefit of section 382-B.Cr. P.C. 1985 SCMR 1041. Muhammad Sharif.
Mitigation: No premeditation to kill. No adequate motive. Fatal attack preceded by half an hour of grappling. Origin of quarrel not known. Sentence reduced to life imprisonment. (DB) PLD 1977 Kar. 108 Karim Bux PLJ 1977 Kar. 140.
Mitigation: sudden occurrence accused having no motive, himself sustaining injuries which were suppressed in F.I.R. and not taking unfair advantage. Sentence under section 304 (II), reduced from 10 years to 5 years' R.I. 1977 P.Cr. LJ 716 Nur Muhammad.
Mitigation: heat of moment. A 20 years old Pathan police constable slapped for dereliction of duty, the rifle taken away and ordered to leave guard room. The constable half an hour later fired 8 rounds into the officer and killed him. Death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. (DB) PLD 1975 Q. 18 Suhbut Khan.
Sudden incident. On the spur of the moment the accused shooting the deceased on being abused. Lesser penalty awarded. (DB) 1995 P. Cr. LJ 1346 Sher Muhammad. PLJ 1995 Cr.C. (Lah.) 289.
MOTIVE AND SENTENCE
Motive, distinction between motive stated being found false and the Court finding another motive. This factor may be considered while deciding quantum of sentence. 1992 SCMR 1988, Ch. Muhammad Yaqub.
Immediate cause of occurrence shrouded in mystery death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. (DB) PLJ 1987 Cr. C. (Lah.) 475 Haq Naqaz PLJ Cr.C. (Lah.) 497 Feroz Din. Contra. PLJ 1987 SC 602 Safdar Abbas etc.
Possibility of accused firing at another person but deceased was hit by mistake existing. Death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. 1996 SCMR 1912, Khalil Ahmed.
Absence of motive or immediate cause not known, held, not to be a mitigating circumstance. PLJ 1987 SC 602, Safdar Abbas. Life sentence enhance to death. (DB) PLD 1992 Pesh. 40 Saeed Gul.
Immediate cause of occurrence not known, story of prosecution found false, Sentence of death not called for, Transportation for life awarded. (DB) PLD 1971 Lah. 708 Muhammad Sharif.
How the attack started not known, it was possible that there was some sort of altercation and the deceased might have been provocative. Capital sentence not called for even though the accused was the aggressor. (DB) 44 Cr. LJ 117 Emp. v. Prem Singh.
Actual and immediate cause of occurrence not clarified by either party, death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. 1992 SCMR 320, Abbas Hussain etc.
Immediate cause of attack not established. It is a mitigating circumstance. Sentence reduced from death to life imprisonment. (DB) PLJ 1975 Cr. C. (Lah.) 395 Khariat Illahi. 1975 P.Cr. LJ 1301 = (DB) 1978 P.Cr. LJ 290 Fazal Haq.
Sudden quarrel and motive not proved, sentence of death reduced to life imprisonment and fine reduced to Rs. 5000/- from Rs. 40,000 (DB) NLR 1985 Cr. 455 Salim Khan.
Motive not proved. Death sentence was reduced to life imprisonment. (DB) PLJ 1998 Cr.C. (Lah.) 332 Naseer Ahmed.
Motive not proved beyond reasonable doubt. Death sentence reduced to life imprisonment with benefit u/S. 382-B, Cr.P.C. Where motive is not proved as mentioned in FIR capital punishment is not at all warranted. 1998 SCMR 1764 Muhammad Ashraf.
Motive not positively proved but remained obscure death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. 1983 SCMR 806. Ali Hussain etc. v. Mukhtar etc. 1984 SCMR 1184 Muhammad Iqbal. (DB) 1992 P.Cr. LJ 472 Asghar Ali ect.
Specific motive for offence not alleged by prosecution, held, the accused could not be awarded death sentence. 1996 SCMR 1747, Mohammad Ashraf Khan Tareen.
Motive alleged not briefed by High Court, about the other motive no question put to the accused u/s 342 Cr. P.C. Both the motive were discernible from the evidence on record. Death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. 1992 SCMR 1983 Ch. Mohammad Yaqub etc.
Motive of murder not satisfactorily proved and shrouded in mystery, death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. 1985 SCMR 489. Mati-ur-Rehman 1985 SCMR 495. Muzamal Din v. Nur Hussain. (DB) 1992 P. CR. LJ 326 Mohammad Shafiq.
Alleged motive not fully proved, held, lesser penalty would amply meet the ends of justice, life imprisonment awarded. 1992 SCMR 1036, Mst. Roheeda v. Khan Bahadar etc.
When motive was not proved High Court reduced death sentence of life imprisonment. Petition for enhancement of sentence dismissed by the Supreme Court. 1994 SCMR 35, Abdul Aziz.
Motive too remote to be accepted: Accused aggrieved of marriage which took place 12 years before. No immediate motive for crime. Lesser sentence for murder justified. 1985 SCMR 501. Sarfaraz etc.
No immediate motive. Motive alleged 22/23 years old. Motive shrouded in mystery. Death sentence reduced to life imprisonment with benefit u/S. 382-B, Cr.P.C. PLJ 1999 SC 269 Muhammad Bashir Ahmed. Also see PLJ 1999 SC 271 Akhtar Ali to the same effect.
Motive and sentence: Motive is not a sine qua non for bringing the offence of murder home to the accused, It is relevant and important on the question of sentence. (SC) NLR 1983 Cr. 682. Ali Hussain v. Mukhtar etc.
Real motive shrouded in mystery, death sentence reduced to life imprisonment, not enhanced by Supreme Court. 1993 SCMR 1376, Hakim Khan.
Motive shrouded in mystery, sentence of death reduced to life imprisonment. 1999 SCMR 1138 Muhammad Yaqub.
Motive shrouded in mystery, sentence of death reduced to life imprisonment PLJ 1980 SC 293 Gul Mir.
When motive shrouded in mystery the Courts normally award lesser punishment for murder u/s 302 PPC. PLJ 1994 S.C 549, Mowaz Khan v. Ghulam Shabbir = 1995 SCMR 1007.
Life sentence enhanced to death for a wife killer who by firing 3 successive shots put her to death on mere suspicion. Motive in such cases is always shrouded in mystery and uncertainty. (DB) PLD 1992 Pesh . 40, Saeed Gul.
No motive. When there is no motive death sentence is inexpedient. (DB) PLD 1959 Kar. 460 Kamber Ali Shah.
"unpremeditated attack, single knife blow in abdomen, held, murder, death sentence maintained. (SC) PLD 1963 SC 285. Dost Muhammad.
Prosecution not giving real cause of incident and suppressing it, lesser sentence for capital offence held proper. 1982 PSC 588. Khan Ahmed. PLJ 1982 SC 350.
No motive assigned for offence; murder taking place over an altercation nature of which is not known. Held a mitigating circumstance. 1980 SMCR 176 Mubarik Ali.
Motive shrounded in mystery and failure of motive alleged by prosecution, held, sentence rightly reduced to life imprisonment. 1987 SCMR 697. Faqir Masih v. Mubarik Masih.
Motive for murder disbelieved, accused is entitled to lesser penalty. (DB) NLR 1990 Cr. 602. Saqlain.
No motive against the injured and the deceased. Possibility that the accused had been roped in being the relations of the co-accused could not be ruled out. Long standing enmity existing between the complainant and the accused uncorroborated evidence could, therefore be not relied upon. Accused acquitted on benefit of doubt. 1993 SCMR 1864, Sadiq.
Motive not proved, leave to appeal allowed to the extent of reducing death sentence to life imprisonment. 1986 SCMR 1578 Mohammad Banaras.
Motive not proved and what happened immediately before the occurrence not known. Death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. PLJ 1999 SC 1008 Naubahar = 1999 SCMR 637
Immediate cause of attack not known, held, extreme penalty of death is not called for. 1986. SCMR 1878. Chand Khan v. Akbar and others.
Mitigation. No Motive or malice against deceased: extreme penalty of death not called for because time that elapsed between quarrel and inflicting of injury not sufficient to have allowed passion to cool down. (DB) PLJ 1975 Cr. C. (Lah.) 112 Javaid.
Motive and sentence. Motive as set up belied by prosecution witnesses and no other motive evidence forthcoming, death sentence altered to life imprisonment. 1977 P. Cr. LJ 377. Abdul Ghani.
Mitigation: weak motive; motive remaining weak side of prosecution, held, benefit of such weakness to be extended to accused by awarding lesser penalty. NLR 1982 Cr. 313 Mst. Farrah Naz.
Safe administration of justice. Out of abundant caution and for safe administration of justice death sentence reduced to life imprisonment, for the murder of wife. (DB) PLD 1976 Lah. 1476 Abdul Majid.
Immediate motive concealed by prosecution entitles accused to lesser sentence u/s. 302, PPC. 1984 SCMR 837. Mohammad Makhdoom.
Immediate cause of occurrence not disclosed by prosecution evidence is no ground for lesser sentence for murder. (DB) PLJ 1976 Lah. 165. Allah Bakhsh etc. Contra. (DB) PLJ 1976 BJ 17 Imam Bakhsh. (DB) PLJ 1978 Cr. C. (Lah.) 202 Fazal Haq.
Real motive of offence shrouded in secrecy: Supreme Court reduced the death sentence to life imprisonment. 1981 SCMR 805 Ghulam Nazir.
Cause of murder shrouded in obscurity and the prosecution not proving motive attributed to the accused. Lesser penalty awarded by the trial court upheld PLD 1976 Lah. 788. Niaz Mohammad. PLJ 1976 Lah. 721 = AIR 1931 Lah. 538=32 Cr. LJ 1083. Sher Singh. 1978 SCMR 257 Vali Mohammad v. Bajoo (DB) 1978 P.Cr. LJ 566 Iqbal Mahmood.
Immediate cause leading to fight between brother not known. Lesser penalty instead of death would meet the ends of justice, (DB) 1976 P.Cr. LJ 556. Abdur Rehman. (DB) 1976 P.Cr. LJ 637 Imam Bakhsh.
What happened immediately before the occurrence and the real reason not disclosed by either party, death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. 1995 SCMR 1668, Zulfikar alias Bhutto = PLJ 1995 S.C 651.
Origin of attack remained shrouded in mystery, as before the witness arrived at the scene the first injury out of three had been inflicted, therefore award of lesser sentence justified. PLJ 1990 SC 358 Iftikhar Ahmed = PLD 1990 SC 820.
Origin of occurrence shrouded in mystery, conviction for murder not sustainable; sudden altercation, accused hit; accused having hit, deceased with wrong side of hatchet cannot be said to be brutal and callous. Death sentence reduced to 7 years R.I. 1980 SCMR 225. Rasul Bakhsh.
Unpremeditated attack and the origin shrouded in mystery, death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. NLR 1991 Cr. 299. Akhtar.
Immediate cause of occurrence shrouded in mystery and the death of the deceased may be due to complications developed later on. Death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. (DB) NLR 1984 Cr. 333. Mati-ur-Rehman. (DB) PLJ 1986 Cr.C. 114. Niaz Ali.
Origin of fight shrouded in mystery and motive appearing to be trivial. Death sentence reduced to life imprisonment with benefit u/s. 382-B, Cr. P.C. 1985 SCMR 975. Ahmed Khan.
Immediate cause of attack not known death sentence reduced to life. (DB) PLJ 1984 Cr. C. (Lah.) 475. Abudl Majid. (DB) PLJ 1986 Cr.C. (Lah.) 200 Liaqat Ali, (DB) PLJ 1986 Cr. C. (Lah.) 205. Mohammad Hanif.
Something appears to have occurred at the spur of the moment which caused the occurrence. Death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. 1983 SCMR 266. Sher Daraz Khan.
Motive for offence not proved or satisfactorily established lesser sentence for murder awarded. (DB) PLJ 1988 Cr. C. (Q) 88. Ali Sher etc.
Parties close relatives, no serious enmity, something did happen before accused shot the deceased, held, a mitigating circumstance. Death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. 1980 SCMR 291. Sher Ali.
Solitary dagger blow caused by appellant proving fatal, but immediate cause remaining undisclosed death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. (DB) PLJ 187 Cr. C. (Pesh.) 469. Gulab.
Occurrence not taking place as alleged by prosecution and motive not proved. Death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. 1988 SCMR 213. Nabi Bakhsh.
Murder committed for very trivial matter and the entire occurrence witnessed, it could not be said that something must have happened before and the sentence should be reduced. 1987 SCMR 1880. Muhammad Hussain v. Mansha.
What happened immediately before occurrence shrouded in mystery. One dagger blow by appellant; lesser sentence awarded. (DB) PLJ 1987 Cr. C. (Lah.) 475 Haq Nawaz.
Two accused at whose alleged instance and instigation deceased was killed were acquitted, thus the real cause of the murder remained unknown. Sentence of death awarded to the accused altered to life imprisonment. 1996 SCMR 1887, Ghulam Ullah etc.
Uncertainty of motive does not affect the sentence of the accused when his guilt is established by reliable ocular evidence. 1987 SCMR 1136 Fazal Ghafoor.
How exactly the occurrence started not known to eye-witnesses. Lesser penalty awarded. NLR 1988 Cr. 375 Iftikhar Ahmed.
HOPE OF MARRIAGE
Deceased not fulfilling his promise of giving his daughter in marriage, held, an extenuating circumstance. Death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. NLR 1985 Cr. 621. Saifal.
Marriage of Mangetar of accused to another person. Mangetar murdered. Held, a mitigating circumstance. NLR 1987 Cr. 405 Muhammad Ali.
Mitigation. False hope of marriage, given by the deceased girl having illicit relations with the appellant. Appellant meeting her in street, asking her to marry him. Girl abusing. Appellant injuring her with knife. Death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. (DB) PLD 1978 Lah. 82. Muhammad Younas.
[Section 382-B, Cr. P.C.]
Benefit u/S. 382-B Cr. P.C. is mandatory but the Court has discretion which should not be exercised arbitrarily or capriciously but should be exercised judiciously on sound judicial principles reviewable by the higher forum in appeal or revision with desire to do complete justice. Some cogent reason which should have nexus with the award of the sentence is to be recorded so that if any error is committed it may be corrected by the higher forum, secondly the accused should also feel that the court applied its mind while declining the benefit u/S. 382-B Cr. P.C. When in appeal death sentence is substituted by life imprisonment or for any other term of imprisonment it is obligatory on the part of the court to take into consideration the question of extending the benefit u/S. 382-B Cr. P.C. while passing the sentence. 1997 SCMR 55, Mukhtar-ud-Din.
Provisions of S. 382-B, Cr.P.C. are mandatory. In absence of express manifestation of the application of mind by the Court that it has addressed itself to the said provision at the time of imposing sentence on the accused, no presumption can be raised in favour of the Court having adverted to the same. Court no doubt in appropriate cases while exercising discretion judicially may refuse to grant protection concerning period spent by the convict as under trial prisoner. 1998 SCMR 1538 Javed Iqbal.
For benefit u/S. 382-B, Cr.P.C. Court must apply mind consciously whether the benefit should be allowed or declined to the convict. When mandatory provision of S. 382-B, Cr.P.C. was not considered for any exceptional circumstances the Supreme Court allowed the benefit. PLJ 1998 SC 1382 Javed Iqbal.
Benefit u/S. 382-B Cr.P.C. cannot be denied simply on the ground that the Court has discretion in the matter. Some cogent reasons which has nexus with award of sentence is to be recorded so that if an error is committed t may be corrected by a higher forum and the accused should also feel that the Court has applied its mind while declining the benefit. PLJ 1997 S.C. 468, Mukhtar-ud-Din.
Life sentence & Sec. 382-B Cr.P.C. Award of imprisonment for life instead of death is no ground for depriving a convict from benefit u/S. 382-B Cr.P.C. for the reason that it has no nexus with the object impleaded in Sec. 382-B Cr.P.C. Object of the provision seems to be to compensate a convict for delay in conclusion of his trial, not attributable to the convict. PLJ 1997 S.C. 468, Mukhtar-ud-Din.
Under Section 382-B Cr. P.C. the Court must "take into consideration" the pre-sentence period spent in jail. In exercising the discretion the court should look to the conduct of the accused, his anticedents and the nature of the offence etc. If the court does not reduce the sentence u/S. 382-B Cr. P.C. it must give reasons for not doing so. The Court's discretion in the matter is liable to be set right by the Court of Appeal and if the justice is seen to be done, the judgment mus show a reasonable consistency as between one case and another. 1995 SCMR 1525, Muhammad Rafiq.
Benefit u/S. 382-B being mandatory cannot be denied to life convicts or for shorter term imprisonments as no such distinction is made in that section. Neither Trail Court nor High Court pointed out any circumstances which would justify denial of the benefit u/S. 382-B Cr. P.C. The trial court had sentenced the petitioner to life imprisonment. High Court maintained the sentence. Leave to appeal was dismissed by the Supreme Court. PLD 1995 S.C 485; 1992 SCMR 2072; PLD 1991 S.C 1065; 1995 SCMR 1525 relied upon. PLJ 1996 Cr.C (Lah.) 1656, Muhammad Saleem.
Benefit of sec.382-B is mandatory, If the court through oversight did not extend the benefit u/S. 382-B, Cr. P.C. it can be allowed later on through a separate application. The benefit was allowed after the appeal had been dismissed by the Federal Shariat Court. PLJ 1991 FSC 85 Akbar Khan.
Concession u/S. 382-B, Cr. P.C. is obligatory while passing a sentence. Reasons must be given for refusing the concession. Concession allowed by High Court in petition u/S. 561-A, Cr. P.C. (DB) NLR 1991 Cr. 36. Muhammad Ilyas.
Sec. 382-B, Cr. P.C. benefit is discretionary with the Court in appropriate causes. In gruesome and brutal case the benefit can be withheld. PLJ 1989 Cr.C. (Kar.) 81 = PLD 1983 Lah. 126 relied. Islam-ud-Din.
U/S. 382 Cr. P.C. sentence not reduced on the ground that sec. 382-B Cr. P.C. does not necessarily mean that period of such detention must of necessity be counted towards period of substantive sentence. Petition was dismissed. (D.B) PLJ 1995 Cr.C (Pesh) 325, Haider Zaman etc.
Benefit u/S. 382/B Cr. P.C. not allowed by the Supreme Court when sentence already awarded by Federal Shariat Court was not maximum and had already been reduced in appeal. 1993 SCMR 224, Shahbaz Afghan.
Benefit u/S. 382-B Cr. P.C. not given when the accused had already been dealt with leniently. NLR 1994 Cr. 368, Manzoor Hussain.
Refusal to grant benefit u/S. 382-B Cr. P.C. on the ground that the accused had already been awarded life imprisonment instated of death has no nexus with the object embedded in sec. 382-B Cr. P.C. However, the reason that the convict had purposely obstructed the trial resulting the delay of its conclusion it has nexus with the object of sec. 382-B Cr. P.C. 1997 SCMR 55, Mukhtar-ud-Din.
Section 382-B, Cr.P.C. Application u/S. 561-A, Cr. P.C. can be made to the High Court within reasonable time for relief u/S. 382, Cr. P.C. even after the case has been disposed of by the High Court. The provision can be applied retrospectively as well. Relief cannot be denied to the prisoner because his counsel or he did not urge for it before the Court, Relief under this section cannot be given to the life convicts. (FB) PLJ 1984 Cr. C. (Lah.) 407. Zulfiqar Ali etc. (DB) PLJ 1984 Cr. C. 438. Aslam Pervaiz OVERRULED. (DB) PLJ 1983 Cr.C. (Lah.) 19 Nur Elahi. NLR 1983 Cr. 128.
Benefit u/S. 382-B, Cr. P.C. can be granted by the appellate court when the trial court has failed to do so. (DB) PLJ 1991 Cr. C. (Lah.) 165 Khan Agha.
Benefit u/S. 382-B Cr. P.C. given in a case under Drugs Act XXXI of 1976 where no feature justifying such denial was mentioned. 1992 SCMR 2072, Amjad.
Benefit of section 382-B, Cr. P.C. Judgment passed but no reduction of sentence u/S. 382-B, Cr. P.C. ordered. Held, High Court u/S. 561-A, Cr. P.C. competent to consider whether accused to benefit u/S. 382-B, Cr. P.C. Jail authorities not to reduce sentence u/S. 382-B, Cr. P.C. on their own, (DB) PLJ 1982 Cr. C. (Kar.) 188. Saleh.
Section 382-B, benefit to accused sentenced to life imprisonment. The period spent under arrest while appeal from acquittal was being heard, Supreme Court allowed benefit of Sec. 382-B Cr. P.C. to accused sentenced to life imprisonment. 1983 SCMR 245 Manzoor v. Home Secretary etc. 1985 SCMR 81. Muhammad Bashir. 1985 SCMR 181 Atta Muhammad etc.
Death sentence already commuted to life imprisonment under Presidential order, benefit u/S. 382-B, Cr. P.C. however, extended to the appellants. 1991 SCMR 270 Abdul Malik.
Provision of section 382-B Cr. P.C. comes into effect only when the Court passes a sentence. Accused cannot claim benefit u/S. 382-B Cr. P.C. outside the judgment and independently of it from the Supreme Court. The benefit cannot be claimed when death sentence is converted into life imprisonment by commutation. 1993 SCMR 319, Mushtaq Hussain; PLD 1991 S.C. 1145 at 1163, Bashir and 3 others.
Benefit u/S. 382-B Cr.P.C. allowed to appellant whose death sentence was commuted to life imprisonment by general Amnesty granted by Federal Government during the pendency of appeal before High Court, although the appeal was dismissed by the Supreme Court. PLJ 1999 SC 844 Bashir.
Benefit u/S. 382-B, Cr.P.C. can be given where death sentence is commuted to the imprisonment under Presidential Amnesty Order. 1998 SCMR 1794 Bashir.
Benefit u/S. 382-B Cr.P.C. is available to the accused where death sentence is altered to life imprisonment. Appellate Court is under obligation to take into consideration the provisions of Sec. 382-B Cr.P.C. if it substituted sentence of death with life imprisonment or rigorous imprisonment for a certain period. Sec. 382-B Cr.P.C. is mandatory provision of law. When Sessions court had declined to grant benefit u/S. 382-B Cr.P.C. on the ground that sentence of life imprisonment had already been awarded to the accused instead of death sentence, held, such reason had no nexus with the object embedded in section 382-B Cr.P.C. which is to compensate the accused for the delay in conclusion of his trial due to various factors generally not attributable to him as the State is supposed to provide speedy justice. when no extraordinary circumstances warranting denial of benefit of Sec. 382-B Cr.P.C. to the accused being available the same was granted to him by the Supreme Court. PLD 1998 S.C. 152, Ghulam Murtaza.
Benefit u/S. 382-B Cr. P.C. allowed where death sentence was reduced to life imprisonment because of General Amnesty, and the appeal of the petitioner had failed before the Supreme Court. High Court relying on 1991 SCMR 270, Abdul Malik & 1995 P.Cr. L.J. 37, (Lah), Muhammad Hussain and others, allowed the benefit u/S. 382 Cr. P.C. (D.B) PLJ 1996 Cr. C (Lah.) 110, Bashir Ahmed etc.
When death sentence in reduced to life imprisonment benefit u/S. 382-B Cr.P.C. is available to the convict unless there are any exceptional circumstances in a case which court considers sufficient for the purpose of denying he benefit u/S. 382-B Cr.P.C. PLJ 1998 SC 903, Ghulam Murtaza.
Benefit of section 382-B Cr. P.C. given where death sentence was reduced to life imprisonment by the Presidential Amnesty Order. 1993 SCMR 1940, Muhammad Shafi v. Abdul Latif etc.
Amnesty and sec. 382-B Cr. P.C. Sentence of death reduced to life imprisonment though confirmed by High Court, because of amnesty and benefit u/S. 382-B Cr. P.C. also allowed. 1995 SCMR 1162, Muhammad Nawaz.
Benefit u/S. 382-B Cr. P.C. not available to convicts who were sentenced to death and their sentences commuted to life imprisonment by Presidential Amnesty Order. PLJ 1995 S.C. 338, Noor Muhammad.
Benefit u/S. 382-B Cr. P.C cannot be extended where death sentence is converted into life imprisonment by general amnesty granted by the President. 1997 SCMR 89, Muhammad Ahmed.
Benefit of Sec. 382-B given by Supreme Court to lifers. 1985 SCMR 780. Ejaz Ahmed etc. 1981 SCMR 260, Manzoor Ahmed. PLJ 1984 SC 190. Muhboob Ali etc. 1986 SCMR 1188 Mst Ghulam Sughra v. Ahmed Khan.
" given to the accused after the disposal of the appeal when petition made u/S. 561-A, Cr. P.C. in the High Court. (DB) NLR 1983 Cr. 296. Munir Hussain NLR 1985 Cr. 610. Ismail.
" When Supreme Court is not passing an original sentence but restoring sentence of trial Court yet giving benefit of section 382-B, Cr. P.C. (SC) NLR 1981 Cr. 14 Ali Sher. PLD 1980 SC 317.
Computation of sentence. Sec. 382-B, Cr. P.C. High Court set aside conviction by trial Court. Supreme Court restored conviction but directed that the period of detention be counted in period of total imprisonment. PLJ 1980 SC 487. Ali Sher:
Period of detention in jail; considered by Supreme Court and sentence reduced to already undergone, on the facts of the case. 1980 SCMR 786. Iqbal Ahmed.
Benefit u/S. 382-B, Cr. P.C. not allowed when sentences awarded were not found to be excessive in view of the cruel manner of the crime. 1988 SCMR 249. Muhammad Amir etc.
Benefit u/S. 382-B, Cr. P.C. Cannot be claimed outside of the judgment and independently of it from the Supreme Court. PLD 1991 S.C. 1145 Bashir etc.
Benefit of u/S. 382-B, Cr. P.C. after jail appeal dismissed given to a life convict after hearing the A.G. Punjab. 1986 SCMR 86. Fateh Khan.
Sec. 382-B, Cr. P.C. benefit to be given to life imprisonment convicts, it being a mandatory provision of law. PLD 1991 S.C. 1065. Qadir.
Benefit u/S. 382-B, Cr. P.C. could be extended to the person awarded life imprisonment. PLD 1992 SC 11. Ramzan etc. PLJ 1992 SC 112 OVERRULED PLD (FB) 1984 Lah. 461. Zulfiqar Ali.
Benefit u/S. 382-B, Cr. P.C. to be allowed in life imprisonment cases. PLJ 1991 S.C. 541. Qadir. etc.
Benefit u/S. 382-B is available to a life convict. PLJ 192 S.C. 112, Ramzan etc. PLJ 1991 S.C. 541 rel. Overruled (F.B.) PLD 1984 Lah. 461, Zulfiqar Ali.
Pretrial detention. Where accused was in custody for about 10 months before trial, the Court can justifiably reduce the sentence by an equal period. 39 Cr. LJ 302 Ram Babu v. Emperor. Also see section 382-B, Cr. P.C.
Concession u/S. 382-B Cr. P.C. can be given by High Court even after the decision of the case in application u/S. 561-A, Cr. P.C. if omitted inadvertently in its judgment. Supreme Court can under Order XXXII rule 6 of Supreme Court Rules and Orders grant the concession after the disposal of the main case. PLJ 1992 Sc 1. Bashir etc.
Benefit u/S. 382-B even after the disposal of appeal can be extended to the accused by the Federal Shariat Court. The Cr. Misc. application was decided on 15-11-93 in Cr. A. No. 10-K-1988 i.e. after about 10 years, as the judgment in appeal was silent about the grant or withholding of the benefit u/S. 382-B Cr. P.C. 1994 P.Cr. LJ 438, Sabir Khan, 1991 P.Cr. Lj (FSC) 845, Akbar Khan relied upon.
Benefit of Sec. 382-B Cr. P.C. given about 2 years after decision of appeal in an application u/S. 561-A Cr. P.C. (DB) 1994 P.Cr. LJ 873, Hakim Khan.
Benefit u/S. 382-B Cr. P.C. allowed by Supreme Court while PSLA did not succeed. 1993 SCMR 188, Bashir etc.
Benefit u/S. 382-B Cr. P.C. allowed to convict for offence u/S. 27(I) of Drugs Act 1976. PLJ 1992 Cr. C. (SAC) 381, Amjad.
POBATION AND PAROLE
Benefit u/S. 382-B Cr. P.C. can be given to the accused even on miscellaneous application by court after passing judgment and while deciding appeal as well. PLJ 1997 Shariat Court (A.J.K) 4, Muhammad Aziz.
Order does not amount to alternation of judgment or review when sentence was passed by the Supreme Court. Neither the Trial Court nor the High Court had pointed out any circumstance which would justify denial of extension of benefit u/S. 382-B Cr. P.C. Benefit u/S. 382-B CCr. P.C. was allowed under the circumstances. PLJ 1996 Cr. C. (Lah) 2087, Muhammad Saleem.
Benefit u/S. 382-B Cr. P.C. to be given by trial court while passing sentence and the benefit can be given even when life imprisonment is awarded. PLD 1995 S.C 485, Liaqat Ali. Ghulam Mustafa v. State, PLD 1995 S.C 488.
PROBATION AND PAROLE
Parole period to be counted as imprisonment. Provisions contained in Good Conduct Prisoner's Probational Release Act, 1926 sections 2 and 4, unless violated the convicts are not to be recalled and detained in jail. PLJ 1987 SC 515. Muhammad Nawaz etc. 1987 SCMR 1399.
Probation of offender's Ordinance 1960. Accused convicted of theft of article worth Rs. 99 and sentence to 1 year R. I. Petitioner a young man, not previous convict. Released on probation under section 5 of the Ordinance. 1973 P.Cr. LJ 118 Muhammad Hanif.
Probation of offenders by Shariat Court. FSC for an offence under Article 11 of Prohibition Order directed the convict to be released and placed on probation for one year instead of imprisonment. PLJ 1985 FSC 107 Azmat Ali.
Jail remission and life convicts. After life convict completing aggregate period of 14 years, including remissions of all kinds worked out on basis of 14 years, the matter will have to be referred to the Provincial Government u/S. 401, Cr. P.C. If the Provincial Government does not want to release the life convict after he has completed 14 years' R.I. it will be presumed that the convict is to undergo an aggregate of imprisonment of 20 years and not 14 years. PLD 1978 Lah. 15 Sh. Muhammad Sharif v. I.G. Prisons etc.
Life Imprisonment is 25 years and total remissions cannot exceed 10 years reducing imprisonment to less than 15 years. (DB) NLR 1989 Cr. 218 Muhammad Afzal v. Home Secretary.
Remission of sentences. A convict sentenced for life is not as of rights entitled to have his sentence as one for 20 years and is not entitled as of right to remission. (PC) ILR 26 Lah. 325 (PC) Pandit Kashori Lal. v. King Emperor.
Remission in jail. Transportation for life is equal to 14 years' R.I. Remission is not to exceed 4 years in all. Lifer is to serve 10 years at least. Remission given by the Central Government is not to be controlled by the Provincial Government. (FB) PLD 1965 Pesh. 31 (35) Farid Khan.
QUANTUM OF SENTENCE
Quantum of punishment. The elements to be considered for assessing the quantum of sentence are: (a) The nature of the offence. (b) The circumstances in which it was committed. (c) The degree of deliberation shown by the offender. (d) The provocation which he received. (e) The antecedents of the prisoner upto the item of sentence. (f) His age and character. These matters should be established by evidence and not by impression created on spur of the moment. (DB) 48 Cr. LJ 721, Emp. v. Usman Haroon.
Total sentence of imprisonment not to exceed life imprisonment (25 years) u/S. 35 Cr.P.C. Petitioner had been sentenced to death u/S. 302 PPC and to 7 years imprisonment u/S. 307 PPC but death sentence was converted to life-imprisonment by Presidential Amnesty Order. Benefit u/S. 382-B Cr.P.C. also allowed in petition under writ jurisdiction. PLJ 1997 Lah. 1083, Nasir v. Superintendent District Jail Lahore.
Maximum sentence given by Court, as provided by law; the court must give reasons for doing so, when worse cases possible. Sentence reduced. AIR 1926 Lah. 239 (SC) (2) Harnam Singh.
Quantum of sentence, is for the trial court or the appellate court to determine considering the circumstances of the case, and necessity of meeting the ends of justice. Supreme Court does not normally interfere with a legal sentence. (SC) 1976 SCMR 338 Ameer Umar.
Leave granted to examine quantum of sentence, whether the sentence of life imprisonment was excessive, u/S. 304 (1), PPC. 1989 SCMR 534 Muhammad Azeem.
Law and order situation judicially noticed. Increase in crime calls for severer sentence. (SC) PLJ 1978 SC 200. Bakhshish Elahi.
Mercy is the attribute of God, but courts are warned not to allow that which is otherwise unlawful. Courts should not show mercy to those who themselves have proved to have acted mercilessly. 1991 SCMR 1622. Muhammad Sharif.
Punishment in corruption cases specially when Court officials are involved must be deterrent. PLJ 1984 SC 336. Muhammad Amin.
Sentence is not a question of Law. A sentence passed by one Judge is not a binding precedent on another in a subsequent case. PLD 1954 Lah. 395 Crown v. Muhammad Shafi.
Previous convictions. Mere admission by accused of previous conviction is not sufficient. All previous convictions for the purpose of section 75, PPC must be proved in accordance with law. Some documentary evidence must be recorded. AIR 1934 Lah. 693. Sardar Ahmed.
Previous conviction under Pure Food Act for adulterating milk. No leniency. Deterrent punishment called for. 1978 P.Cr. LJ 273 Mauji.
Quantum of sentence factors. Salmonds says, Punishment is before all things deterrent, and the chief end of the law of crimes is to make the evil doer an example and a warning to all that are like-minded. The increase of the crime is a circumstance relevant for the question of sentence. Much more important factors in the instant case are: Did the appellant act in a brutal or callous manner or was he responsible for the provocation which led to the scuffle? If the answer is negative sentence of transportation for life would not be justified. (SC) 1977 SCMR 309. Bakhshish Elahi. 1977 SCMR 389.
Sentence reduced from 10 years to 5 years in case u/S. 10(2) offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979. Benefit u/S. 382-B allowed. 1988 SCMR 1772 relied upon. 1996 SCMR 1089, Muhammad Riaz.
Sentence of Zina with consent should be minimum for a first offender of 18 years. Sentence reduced to 5 years. PLJ 1991 FSC 20. Naseer Ahmed.
Quantum of sentence. Rape. 18 years old accused committing rape on a girl of 11 sentenced to 8 years. High Court reduced it to 4 years already undergone considering it to meet ends of justice. 1977 P.Cr. LJ 70 Soomar.
Normal sentence in murder cases is death. (Section 357, Cr. P.C.). PLD 1960 Pesh. 132 State v. Inzur Gul etc.
Lesser sentence adequate reasons must be given for passing lesser penalty for murder. Death sentence is the normal penalty in a murder case. (DB) AIR 1933 Pat. 100 Musaddi Rai v. Emperor.
Death is normal sentence for the offence of murder. Lesser sentence is to be awarded when there are mitigating circumstances. (SC) PLJ 1975 SC 162 Nuran v. Nura etc.
Proper sentence for murder is death or life imprisonment. (DB) PLD 1976 Lah. 1418 Bodhi. etc.
Death sentence. Hesitation in awarding. The Supreme Court has observed a marked tendency to find laboured pretext to alter death sentence to life imprisonment. Frequent remissions of sentences and tendency to commute death sentence to life imprisonment are factors responsible for incidence of heinous crime. Necessity of awarding deterrent sentences to avoid repetition of violent crime causing loss of life is the principle to be observed while sentencing co-accused constructively liable. (SC) PLD 1976 SC 452 Muhammad Sharif v. Muhammad Javid. PLJ 1976 SC 346.
Sentence u/S. 377, of 3 years' R.I. reduced to already undergone so that the accused who was 22 years is given another chance to reform. PLJ 1979 Cr.C. (Lah) 259 Ashiq. 1979 P.Cr. LJ 480.
Offence under section 377, P.P.C. calls for heavy sentence. Light sentence is miscarriage of justice. Accused 18 years old committed offence on a child 5 years old. Sentence of 10 stripes by Magistrate enhanced to 5 years R.I. in addition. PLD 1959 Lah. 677 State v. Wali Muhammad.
Light sentence under section 377, P.P.C. not interfered with. In Criminal Revision No. 41 of 1955 in Crown v. Abdul Hye and another Muhammad Yaqub, J. of Lahore High Court did not enhance the sentence of imprisonment till the rising of the Court and a fine of Rs. 5,000 each on the ground that more than 10 years had elapsed since and the boys were reforming. AIR 1936 Lah. 254 ref.
Dacoity case. Deterrent sentence approaching the maximum should be passed. Section 397, P.P.C. does not mean that the accused who have used dangerous weapons should not be given 7 years' R.I. or above. In this case life sentences were passed. (DB) 43 Cr. LJ 97 = 197 IC 19 Bansi etc. v. Emp.
Robbery-Offence u/S. 397 & 394 PPC Sentence, sentence reduced from life imprisonment to 8 years R.I. (DB) 1994 P.Cr. LJ 1127, Shahbaz Ahmed etc.
Deterrent sentence should be awarded in corruption cases, if offence is proved against the accused. PLD 1987 SC 500 = PLJ 1987 SC 620. Malik Muhammad.
Sentence under Excise Act for illicit distillation. Deterrent sentence should be even. ILR 7 Lah. 32 Crown v. Piyara Singh.
Reduction of death sentence on equitable grounds is not the functions of Federal Court. Prerogative of the Government. (FC) PLD 1954 FC 282. Sher Muhammad v. Crown.
Appeal from acquittal-Practice of Peshawar High Court is not to award capital sentence. (DB) PLD 1956 Pesh. 74 State v. Muhammad Qayum.
Death to 5 and transportation to 3 accused for the murder of one person committed jointly by the accused. (SC) PLD 1963 SC 89 Fateh Khan etc.
Death to 10 accused for the murder of 3 persons committed jointly. (DB) PLD 1958 Lah.. 30 Dargahi etc.
Death to 3 accused and transportation for life to 3 accused persons for the murder of one man. (DB) PLD 1960 Lah. 687 Bashir Ahmad.
Death to 3 for one murder. Mere fact that 3 men will die for the murder of one man is no ground for imposing lesser penalty. (DB) PLD 1962 Lah. 58 Mela etc.
Death to 7 and transportation for life to one accused for the murder of 2 men. Where several persons joined to murder everyone should receive death sentence, no matter who struck the fatal blow. (DB) ILR 17 Lah. 536 Chanan etc. v. Crown.
Not more than one man to die for murder of one man? Distinction in sentence where the guilt of several accused proved to be equal and undistinguishable, disapproved. Sentencing only one brother to death and awarding lesser penalty to others on the ground "that Courts have always been reluctant to sentence more than one person to death for murder of one man"-Held, Distinction made in awarding sentence wholly without any valid basis. Supreme Court was constrained to reduce the sentence of the third brother to transportation for life. (SC) PLD 1970 SC 477. Shahab Ali.
Whose shot hit the deceased in the darkness could not be ascertained. Supreme Court while converting acquittal into conviction sentenced them to life imprisonment. 1889 SCMR 1461. Shehruddin v. Allah Rakhio etc.
Who fired the fatal shot not clear. Out of 5 accused it was not clear who had hit the deceased. Although the case was under section 302/149, PPC and the allegation was that all the accused had fired at the deceased but only one pellet had caused death. Sentence of death was reduced to transportation for life in the circumstances. (DB) 1971 P.Cr. LJ 205. Sarfraz etc. (DB) Contra ILR 16 Lah. 1131 Mewa v. The Crown. Not known who gave the fatal stick blow out of two accused, lesser penalty awarded. (DB) 1978 P.Cr. LJ 490. Sibtain Shah.
Who fired the fatal shot not established with certainty. Sentence of death awarded to the accused altered to life imprisonment. 1995 SCMR 142, Allah Dad and another.
Responsibility of fatal shot fired by any one of the accused in case u/S. 302, 148, 149 PPC having not been fixed on any particular accused, all of them may be awarded life imprisonment. (D.B) PLJ 1997 Cr.C. (Lah) 949, Muhammad Anwar.
Not certain who inflicted the fatal injury. The sentence of death passed on one accused also reduced to life imprisonment. (DB) NLR 1984 Cr. 608. Faiz Muhammad.
Fatal shot not attributable with certainty to the appellant. Death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. 1984 SCMR 1069. Saeed etc.
Who fired the fatal shot not clear. Death sentence reduced to life imprisonment. PLJ 1985 SC 36 Atta Muhammad.
Man inflicting fatal blow not known. A number of persons beating a man with intention to kill him. Man dying. Person responsible for the fatal blow not known. There is no justification for refraining to pass death sentence on all concerned because the man inflicting the fatal blow is not known (DB) 42 Cr. LJ 475 Emp. v. Ram Lal etc. Contra. (DB) 1978 P.Cr. LJ 490 Sibtain Shah.
Death sentence is justifiable to all the accused when the guilt of several accused persons concerned in a murder crime is proved to be equal and undistinguishable. Picking just one person out of the lot to pay by his life for murder and to save others is wholly illogical. Murder committed in barbarous manner, the award of lesser sentence would be miscarriage of justice (SC) PLJ 1975 SC 354 Nabu.
Lesser sentence to those armed with dangs etc. Six accused convicted and sentenced to death for the murder of one man. Four of them armed only with dangs and wooden thapis. Sentence of four altered from death to transportation for life. (SC) 1979 SCMR 165 Atta Muhammad etc.
Leading part and minor role. Difference in sentence between those taking leading part and those playing minor role. Several accused acting in concert, lying in ambush and with common object of killing deceased. All constructively liable for the murder. Difference, however, can legitimately be made in respect of sentence between accused taking leading part and those playing minor role only. Sentence of 2 reduced from death to transportation for life. (SC) 1968 SCMR 716 Shafoo etc.
Transportation for life and not life imprisonment was the punishment when offence committed in 1964. Life imprisonment amounts to 25 years imprisonment which came into force with effect from 14th April, 1972. Sentence altered from life imprisonment to transportation for life. (SC) 1978 SCMR 292 Abdur Rehman.
Sentence of life imprisonment is legally wrong because when the offence was committed law provided for transportation of life which amounts to lesser term of imprisonment. (DB) 1977 P.Cr. LJ 1977 Muhammad Ishaq.
Sentence u/S. 11, Ord. VII of 1979: Supreme Court has held that instead of "Shall be punished with imprisonment for life" read "Shall be punished with imprisonment which may extend to life." PLJ 1991 SC 296. Hasham Khan.
Supreme Court would interfere in matters of quantum of Sentence where sentence is measured fancifully in breach of recognised principles. (SC) PLD 1976 SC 447 Shaheb Ali.
Supreme Court as a rule does not interfere in legal sentence. (SC) 1971 SCMR 378. Muhammad Rafiq. (SC) 1973 SCMR 327 Rehmud Din.
Magistrate not purporting to act as section 30 Magistrate but describing himself as such in the heading of the judgment, Held, he could not exceed the powers of First Class Magistrate while sentencing the accused. 7 Cr. JJ 461. Mahi v. Emperor.
Section 30 Magistrate not signing as such on the judgment but awarding sentence in excess of the powers of a First Class Magistrate. Sentence held illegal. AIR 1934 Lah. 361 (1) Emperor v. Sukhdeo Raj.
Short sentence because of doubt. Recovery of 331/4 tolas of stolen gold. Magistrate convicted and sentenced the accused to 1 year's R.I. Additional Sessions Judge in appeal reduced it to 6 months' R.I. Doubts about satisfactory nature of evidence of recovery. Benefit of doubt should lead to acquittal and not conviction of the accused with a short sentence. PLD 1963 Lah. 451. Mukhtar. 1978 P.Cr. LJ 29 Sardar Muhammad.
Sudden affair, no previous enmity, parties closely related, sentence reduced to life imprisonment. 1994 SCMR 88, Muhammad Siddiq.
Sentence of Whipping in cases of Taazir has been abolished under Act VII of 1996. PLJ 1996 FSC 288, Muhammad Aslam.
Whipping for offence under section 377, P.P.C. Accused acting in cruel manner by committing carnal intercourse with a boy of tender age. Deterrent sentence called for. Sentence enhanced by awarding 5 stripes in addition. 1970 P.Cr. LJ 789. Nemat Ali.
Whipping. Causing fear of bodily injury essential for imposing sentence of whipping, bare statement of victim that the accused "frightened me" without mentioning in what way, held, is not enough for imposing sentence of whipping. (SC) PLD 1972 SC 36 Atta Muhammad.
Whipping for offence under section 377, P.P C. High Court enhanced the sentence after the accused had served his original sentence and also awarded 15 stripes for offence under section 377, P.P.C. PLD 1967 Lah. 357. Atta Muhammad.
Whipping as executed at present; does not appear to be Islamic. 1980 P.Cr. LJ 927. Taj Muhammad etc.
Whipping under Ord. is to be executed at a public place. There is no restriction about minors or person over 45 years of age. Zina Hudood Ordinance overrides all other laws. 1982 PSC 1337. Nazir Ahmed.
Ta'zir mean any punishment other than Hadd which is not fixed by law-giver but is left to the discretion of Qazi and is based on the principles laid down by the Holy Quran and Sunnah. Even after the compounding of the offence by Wali of the deceased the Court may sentence the accused to punishment by way of Ta'zir to safeguard the interest of the society. (D.B) PLD 1996 Q 56, Muhammad Akbar = PLJ 1996 Cr.C (Q) 1300.
College Student. Being a college student is no ground for lesser sentence. (SC) PLD 1976 SC1. Dosa. PLJ 1976 SC 20.
Dejected lover. Being a dejected lover and committing murder in such state of mind is no ground for lesser penalty. (DB) PLD 1976 BJ 9. Rehmat. 1979 P.Cr. LJ 17. Wali Muhammad.
Religious zeal is not a mitigating factor. Accused murdering member of another religious sect deserves the extreme penalty of law. 1977 SCMR 316. Shah Iqbal.
No mitigation religious feelings: Accused 20 years of age and prompted by feelings of veneration for the founder of his religion and anger at one who had scurrilously attacked him was not considered a sufficient reason for not imposing the extreme penalty. AIR 1930 Lah. 157 = 30 Cr. LJ 1125 Ilam Din. AIR 1930 Lah. 51=31 Cr. LJ 527. Allah Wadhaya.
Insanity mitigation. Medical evidence showing accused treated twice in mental hospital for schizophrenia. Motive flimsy. Act appearing to the result of violent feelings of anger and hatred. Held, accused entitled to lesser penalty of life imprisonment. 1980 SCMR 892. Ijaz Ahmed.
Mitigation. Accused not planning to kill anyone but indulging in firing at crowd under intoxication. A mitigating circumstance, sentence of death reduced to life imprisonment. (DB) 1975 P.Cr. LJ 59. Mirza Inayat Beg PLJ 1975 Cr. C. (Kar.) 455.
Punishment of death according to Islam where under Hadd the offence already committed or sought to be committed is one liable to Hadd of death. 1992 SCMR 2047, State v. Muhammad Hanif.
Detention u/S.s 81 and 82 of Land Revenue Act declared illegal on petition u/S. 491 Cr. P.C. when notice was not given twice and provisions of sections 81 & 82 of Punjab Land Revenue Act were not complied with PLJ 1993 Cr. C. (Lah.) 417 Pehalwan v. Manager ADB Pakistan.
Infliction of one blow without attempt to repeat it constitutes ground for lesser penalty. (DB) NLR 1991 Cr. 219. Sikandar Beg etc.
Complainant party took away cattle of the accused and failed to give reasonable justification for that, held, High Court had rightly reduced the sentence to life imprisonment. 1989 SCMR 2002. Abdul Khaliq.
Voluntary drunkenness is no ground for lesser sentence on murder charge. (DB) AIR 1926 Lah. 428. Waryam Singh.
Lalkara (Conviction) -The accused who did not use his weapon but raised a lalkara only sentenced to life imprisonment. PLJ 1984 SC 27. Muhammad Ali.
Sentence of abettor could not in propriety be greater than that of principal accused. 1991 SCMR 2018. Raees Jumma.
Confessing accused to be dealt with leniently provided confession is made early and helps in locating co-accused. 1988 SCMR 1899. Nadir Khan.
Lesser punishment when possessor rights interfered with: Supreme Court gave no protection because of private right of defence of property as unarmed persons were killed and injured. However, the accused were given lesser sentence for murder as the possessor rights were interfered with by the complainant party. PLJ 1986 SC 450. Dost Muhammad Khan v. Fateh Khan etc.
Confiscation of licensed gun not used in crime, held order bad and set aside. PLJ 1990 Cr. C. (Kar.) 327. Imdad Ali = NLR 1990 Cr. 537.
"Liable to confiscation" means may be confiscated in the judicial discretion of the Court and not that it shall be confiscated. Station wagon confiscated by the Court was ordered to be returned to the petitioner. PLJ 1974 Cr. C. (Kar.) 463. Harry Edwards.
Vehicle cannot be confiscated when the owner is not concerned with the offence. A pick-up was stolen and used for smuggling, which was taken into possession by customs. Supreme Court restored it to the owner. (SC) PLJ 1974 SC 204 Abdul Razzak v. Pakistan.
Life imprisonment means imprisonment for 25 years and transportation for life means 20 years' R.I. PLD 1975 Lah. 881 Muhammad Ashraf.
Death sentence confirmed for offence u/S. 364-A, PPC, when 4 years old girl was recovered from the gunny bag being carried by the appellant. (DB) PLD 1989 Lah. 259. Bibi Raisa.
Appropriation of sentence suffered: Accused sentenced to 6 months' R.I. in a case and to 2 months' R.I. in another case on the same day. Sentence of 6 months' R.I. was set aside in appeal. Held, 2 months' R.I. already suffered could be appropriated for sentence of 2 months in force (DB) 48 Cr. LJ 577. Partumal.
Right to class A or Bin Jail is not an enforceable right. 1980 SCMR 632, Abdul Rashid. PLJ 1980 Sc 47.
Sentence in default of payment of fine already undergone by convict, held, trial court could not issue warrants to the collector for realisation of fine as bar is created u/S. 386(1) proviso Cr. P.C. 1993 SCMR 1671, Bashir Ahmed v. Muhammad Siddique = PLJ 1933 SC 410.
Accused cannot be sentenced u/S.s. 279 and 338 PPC simultaneously. Conviction u/S. 279 PPC set aside. Sentence u/S. 338 read with 427 PPC maintained. PLJ 1993 Cr. C. (Pesh.) 474? Haris Khan.
Conviction u/S.s 392 and 397 PPC cannot be recorded separately and concurrently as Sec. 397 PPC being the graver offence would take over and sec. 392 PPC by itself would not be attracted to the case. 1992 SCMR 2066, Muhammad Arif.
Who inflicted the fatal injury not know, held, appellants were entitled to lesser sentence. (DB) PLJ 1993 Cr. C. (Kar.) 391, Muhammad.
Only one shot had hit the deceased, but two persons had been charged for murder. Sentence of death reduced to life imprisonment. 1992 SCMR 1597, Saiful Maluk etc.
Detention of youthful offenders under 16 years and Sindh Children Act XII of 1955. The trial court found the youth full offender guilty of murder who was below 16 years. No sentence was passed on him. His case was reported u/S. 68 of Sindh Children Act, 1955 to the Provincial Government. The Provincial Govt. ordered the detention of the convict for 7 years. The order when challenged in High Court that the child could not be ordered to be detained beyond the age of 18 years High Court ordered the release of the convict as he could not be detained beyond the age of 18 years. 1993 SCMR 1551, Province of Sindh v. Din Muhammad.
Sentence of amputation of right hand from wrist and left leg from ankle imposed by trial court was upheld by the Supreme Appellate Court when the appeal against the offence of Property Ordinance VI of 1979 was dismissed. 1994 SCMR 1466, Muhammad Ashraf.
Prosecution evidence stood rejected totally, statement of accused has to be accepted in totality without scrutiny. Sentence u/S. 302(b) reduced to already under gone u/S. 302(c) PPC (DB) PLJ 1999 Cr.C. (Lah.) 66 Munawar.