PESHAWAR: The Peshawar High Court has upheld conviction of a person by a trial court for killing two youngsters while resorting to firing in the air during a marriage ceremony in Hangu district around four years ago.

A single-member bench of Justice Sahibzada Asadullah dismissed an appeal filed by the convict, Syed Nasir Hussain, and ruled that the prosecution had fully proved its case against him. The convict had started firing in the air during a function held in connection with marriage of Hassan Ali on March 31, 2019.

During firing, he lost control over his Kalashnikov rifle that resulted in injuries to two youngsters named Muzamil Abbas and Mohammad Khan. They were taken to a hospital but they succumbed to their injuries.

FIR against petitioner was filed in Hangu four years ago

The FIR of the occurrence was registered at City police station, Hangu, on complaint of an uncle of the deceased Muzamil Abbas wherein the appellant as well as the bridegroom were charged for the commission of the offence.

The appellant was convicted by an additional district and sessions judge whereas the bridegroom was acquitted.

The court sentenced the appellant to three years rigorous imprisonment under section 15 of Arms Act. He was also convicted under section 322 (un-intentional murder) of Pakistan Penal Code. He was directed to pay Diyat amount of Rs2.77 million each to the legal heirs of the deceased persons. The court ordered that he should remain imprisoned till payment of the Diyat money.

Advocate Syed Bilal Jan appeared for the complainant and stated that the appellant had escaped from the scene of occurrence and was subsequently arrested by police. He argued that the rifle used in the occurrence was also recovered on his pinpointing.

He argued that the appellant was directly charged in the FIR and the evidence on record connected him with the commission of the offence. He stated that one of the deceased was 14 years of age whereas the other one was 19. He added that because of their young age, the appellant did not deserve any leniency.

The appellant’s counsel contended that his client was falsely implicated in the instant case as he had not attended the said marriage function. He added that the prosecution had also not laced on record any invitation card to prove that any marriage function was taking place at the time of occurrence.

He argued that no weapon was recovered from his client and in fact the rifle produced by police was given to them by the complainant party and by the appellant.

Published in Dawn, May 4th, 2023