Lawyers Directory Listing
Chat with us free on WhatsApp — tell us your city and legal matter and our team connects you with the right lawyer. No form, no fee.
Criminal Petition for Special Leave to Appeals Nos. 469, 470 and 495 of 1981, decided on 6th May, 1985
‑‑‑Art. 185(3)‑‑Penal Code (XLV of 1860), S, 307/34‑‑Appreciation of evidence‑‑Leave to appeal granted to consider whether well‑established principles of appreciation of evidence in criminal cases have been followed by Courts below.
S. M. Zafar, Advocate Supreme Court and Mehdi Khan Mehtab, Advocate‑on‑Record for Petitioners.
Nemo for the State.
Date of hearing: 6th May, 1985.
‑This order will dispose of:
(i) Criminal P.S.L.A. No. 469 of 1981 filed by Daud and Suleman against their conviction;
(ii) Criminal P.S.L.A. No. 470 of 1981 filed by Mehraj Din against the acquittal of Hameed and Siddiq respondents; and
(iii) Criminal P.S.L.A. No. 495 of 1981, filed by Sultan Muhammad for the enhancement of sentences of Daud and Suleman (Petitioners in Criminal P.S.L.A. No. 469 of 1981).
2. The dispute out of which the present cases have arisen relates to a mosque situated in a graveyard in Basti Manzoorabad, Multan. The Imam of the mosque and his party belong to Ahli Hadees Sect, while fairly a sizable part of the population in the Basti belong to the Brailli Sect. The use of the mosque and the Janazgah by those belonging to Ahli Hadees Sect, is 'stated to have been resented by the members of the Brailvi Sect. This gave rise to litigation, both criminal and civil, between the parties which ultimately led to the incident in question.
3. The said incident took place on the Lid Day (14‑12‑1975) within the precincts of the mosque. It is alleged that persons of the Ahli Hadees persuasion had gathered there to say the Lid prayers and were attacked by members of the Brailvi Sect. There was a fight between the parties in which one person from each side lost his life and some others were injured. Two separate F.I.Rs. were registered regarding the incident and one of the parties also filed a private complaint.
4. Both the cases were tried by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Multan, who convicted Hameed and Siddiq (respondents in Criminal Petition No. 470 of 1981) of the Brailvi Sect, under section 302/34, P.P.C. for the murder of one Mukhtar, of the Ahli Hadees side, and sentenced Hameed to death and a fine of Rs.5,000. Siddiq was sentenced to imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs.5,000. They were also sentenced to 2 years' R.I. and a fine of Rs.500 each (in default six months' further R.I.) under section 307/34, P.P.C. The remaining 19 co‑accused were acquitted.
5. In the cross‑case Daud and Suleman (petitioners in Criminal Petition. No. 469 of 1981) of the Ahli Hadees party, were convicted by the learned trial Court under section 302/34, P.P.C. for the murder of one Sharif (of the Brailvi side). They were sentenced to death and fine of Rs.5,000 each under section 302/34, P.P.C. The remaining 13 co‑accused were, however, acquitted.
6. The convicts /accused of each side filed appeals before the High Court.
7. The High Court, by its judgment, dated 24‑11‑1981 acquitted Hameed and Siddiq of the charges under section 302/307/34, P.P.C. and set them at liberty, while by a judgment of even date, it dismissed the appeal of Daud and Suleman (petitioners in Criminal Petition No. 469 of 1981), but reduced their sentences from death to imprisonment for life.
8. The State had also filed an appeal against the acquittal of Karam Din and some others which was accepted by the High Court with respect to Karam Din. He was also convicted under section 302, P.P.C. and sentenced only to imprisonment for life mainly on the ground that the parties were over‑powered by religious frenzy.
9. This has given rise to the present petitions. Daud and Suleman have filed a petition against their conviction. Karam Din has also filed an appeal as of right (Criminal Appeal No. 83 of 1981), against his conviction. On the other hand Sultan Muhammad of the Brailvi Sect, has filed a petition (Criminal Petition No. 495 of 1981) for the enhancement of their sentences.
10. Similarly Mehraj Din of the Ahli Hadees side has filed a petition (Criminal Petition No. 470 of 1981) for leave to appeal against the acquittal of Hameed and Siddiq by the High Court.
11. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners (in Criminal Petition No. 469 of 1981) and feel that this is a fit case for grant of leave to consider whether the well‑established principles of appreciation of evidence in criminal cases have been followed by the Courts below. We, therefore, order accordingly.
12. Since the remaining two petitions (i.e. Criminal Petition No. 470 of 1981 and Criminal Petition No. 495 of 1981) arise out of the same incident between the same parties, we feel that leave should also be granted, for the same purpose. It is, therefore, ordered accordingly.
13. All the appeals shall be heard together alongwith Criminal Appeal No. 83 of 1981, filed by Karam Din appellant.
M. I. Leave granted.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer