September 11, 2002	Wednesday	Rajab 3, 1423

Please Visit our Sponsor (Ads open in separate window).

ISLAMABAD, Sept 10: The Supreme Court has ruled that death penalty can be awarded to an accused in murder case even when the fatal shot is not attributed to him.

The apex court ruling says that when the prosecution proves its case in an offence of murder and role of two or more accused is identical then there is no justification to award lesser punishment in absence of any mitigating circumstances.

A bench, comprising Chief Justice, Sheikh Riaz Ahmad, Justice Mian Mohammad Ajmal and Justice Mohammad Nawaz Abbasi, in its judgment on Tuesday, upheld the high court order of enhancing the punishment of the accused from life imprisonment to death sentence.

The apex court bench ruled that when the guilt of several accused persons concerned in a murder crime is proved to be equal and undistinguishable, it would be wholly illogical to pick just one person out of the lot to pay by his life for the murder of the deceased and to secure the others.

The court did not concur with the legal proposition adumbrated by the appellant’s counsel that where the fatal shot was not attributed to a specific accused, death penalty could not be awarded.

The apex court ruled that while deciding the quantum of sentence the courts should consider three factors , a) the nature and circumstances in which the offence was committed, ii) the preplanning and premeditation of the offence and venue of the occurrence, and iii) the provocation or any other mitigating circumstance and antecedents, age and character of the offender.

The LHC, had altered the sentence of the appellant, Mohammad Bahadar, and two others, had been accused of murdering one Azizullah in the premises of District Court Khushab.

The trial court had awarded life imprisonment to three persons, who had been accused of firing simultaneous on the deceased.

While hearing appeals, a division bench of Lahore High Court had acquitted one accused but altered the punishment of the appellant to death sentence.

The Supreme Court had “granted leave to appeal” only to consider the question of quantum of sentence when the prosecution establishes its case.

The counsel for the appellant had contended that since his co-accused Khuda Dad and Sher Mohammad had been attributed identical role of firing on the deceased, but the prosecution evidence Sher Mohammad has not been believed by the high court and was acquitted of the charge but on the same evidence he had been awarded capital punishment.

The counsel had argued that fatal shot had not been attributed to his client with certainty, therefore, liability of the appellant being vicarious, his sentence of death be reduced to life imprisonment which would meet the ends of justice.