Find a Lawyer

Criminal Petition for Special Leave to Appeal No.107/R of 1983, decided on 12th February, 1984.

(On appeal from the judgment and order of Peshawar High Court, Abbottabad Circuit, dated 12‑11‑1982, in Criminal Revision No.64 of 1981).

‑‑‑Art. 185(3)‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1960), S.307‑‑Attempt to murder‑ Evidence‑‑Requirements for conviction under S.307, P. P.C‑‑Courts below relying on ocular testimony of witnesses‑‑Medical evidence also supporting complainant's case‑‑Leave to appeal refused.

Sh. Zafar Mahmood Senior Advocate Supreme Court and Ch. Akhtar Ali, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners.

Nemo for Respondents.

Date of hearing: 12th February, 1984.

.‑ Zakaullah and Ataullah were tried under section 307/34, P.P.C by a learned EAC/MIC empowered under section 30, Cr.P.C, alongwith Ehsanullah, acquitted by the learned High Court. All the three accused were sentenced to 4 years' R.I and a fine of Rs.500 each or six months' R.I to each in default. Appeal of the convicts was dismissed and conviction and sentence recorded by the trial Court, maintained by the learned Sessions Judge, Mansehra vide order, dated 18‑‑6‑81. Revision petition fled before the High Court was dismissed vide the impugned order. Benefit of section 382‑B, Cr.P.C. was, however, extended to the petitioners, while the third accused Ehsanullah was acquitted.

2. The learned counsel for the petitioners contended that while deciding the case the Courts below have not taken into consideration the fact that some of the witnesses cited in the F.I.R. were not produced by the prosecution and on the contrary, a relation of the complainant, not named in the F .I . R. , was examined and that such attitude has been characterized as reprehensible in legal precedents; that the injuries caused to the complainant were of simple nature and the reasons given by the learned Courts below, holding the case of the petitioners to fall under the purview of section 307/34, P.P.C. are untenable.

3. We have considered the contentions raised by the learned counsel and find no substance in his arguments. All the Courts below have relied on the ocular testimony of the witnesses. Dr.Shafiqur Rehman's evidence also supports the complainant's case, who found four incised wounds on Atai Khan complainant and a firearm entrance wound and two incised wounds on Iqbal Khan, P.W. To support the conviction under section 307, P.P.C. the intention of the accused to cause injury likely to cause death, and the fact that the injury had been providentially relatively slight ‑is not relevant to the provisions of this section. All that is necessary in such a case is that the act must be capable of causing death in the natural course of things and if it is not of that description, the assailant would not be, guilty of the offence of attempt to murder. In the circumstances of each case it is the knowledge, intention and the surrounding circumstances under which the act is done, are important and to justify conviction under this section it is not essential that actual injuries, capable of causing death, should have been inflicted. We find no merit in this petition, which is, accord ingly, dismissed.

S . Q . Petition dismissed.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.