Find a Lawyer

Criminal Appeal No. 752 of 1975, heard on 2nd July, 1985.

---S. 307--Attempt to murder--Evidence--Ample reliable evidence available to prove that accused launched murderous assault on prosecution witness and his father--No reasonable possibility of defence version being true existing--Trial Court applying its conscious mind to relevant evidence and giving sound and cogent reasons ill support of its decision against accused--Conviction maintained.

---S. 307--Attempt to murder--Convict.ion--Sentence--Occurrence taking place in year 1970 and trial concluded in 1975--Accused remaining ill jail for some time as an under-trial prisoner and for two months after their conviction--During occurrence accused and his; mother receiving injuries including one grievous injury on person of his mother--Agony of protracted trial and imprisonment suffered by accused, held, sufficient to meet ends of justice.

Nemo for Appellants.

Saleem Shad for the State.

Date of hearing: 2nd July; 1985.

This Criminal Appeal arises from the judgment of learned Magistrate Section 30, Narowal whereby he on 18-8-1975 convicted l.al Masih, Sucha Masih, Nazar Masih and Sadiq Masih appellants under section 307, P.P.C. and sentenced them to seven years' R.I. and a fine of Rs.500 in ,default thereof three months' R.I.

2. The case was called. Neither the appellants nor their learned counsel entered appearance.

3. No doubt Lal Masih has died but since he was also awarded fine of Rs.500 the appeal even to his extent does not abate. I proceed to dispose of the appeal with the assistance of learned counsel for the State.

4. I have examined the evidence on record and the judgment of the trial Court with care. 1 find that there is ample reliable 'evidence more particularly the statement made by Inayat P.W. the injured person to prove that the appellants had launched murderous assault on Inayat P.W. and his father Sardar and that there is no reasonable possibility of the defence version being true. The learned trial Court has applied its conscious mind to the relevant evidence and given sound and cogent reasons in support of its decision. For all these reasons no exception can be taken to the conviction of the appellants.

5. This brings me to the question of sentence. In the circumstances that the occurrence took place in the year 1970; that the appellants remained in jail for some time as under trial prisoner; that the trial concluded in the year 1975; that during the occurrence Nazar appellant/ accused and his mother Mst. Nemo also received injuries including one grievous injury on the person of Mst. Nemo and that the appellants remained in jail for about two months after their conviction, I am of the view that the agony of protracted trial and the imprisonment suffered by them would meet the case.

M. Y. H.

Appeal partly accepted.

Find a Lawyer Near You

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