IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(APPELLATE JURISDICTION) 
 
PRESENT: 
MR. JUSTICE SAJJAD ALI SHAH 
MR. JUSTICE SAYYED MAZAHAR ALI AKBAR NAQVI 
 
JAIL PETITION NO.382/2017 
(Against the judgment of the Lahore High Court 
Lahore dated 02.02.2017 passed in Murder 
Reference No.208/2013 and Criminal Appeal 
No.310-J/2013). 
 
Munir Akhtar @ Munir Ahmad  
 
 
…Petitioner(s) 
VERSUS 
The State  
 
 
…Respondent(s) 
 
For the Petitioner(s): 
Miss Tehmina Mohibullah Kakakhel ASC, at 
State expenses  
 
 
For the State 
Mirza Muhammad Usman DPG Punjab  
 
 
Date of Hearing: 
08.10.2020 
… 
ORDER 
 
SAYYED MAZAHAR ALI AKBAR NAQVI, J:-  
Crl. MA No.1165/17 in JP No.382/2017:- The instant miscellaneous 
application is filed for condonation of delay. The matter pertains to criminal 
appeal against conviction, therefore, delay of filing said petition is 
condoned in the interest of safe dispensation of justice.  
JAIL PETITION No.382/2017:- 
Criminal petition for leave to appeal 
under Article 185(3) of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 
1973 has been sought calling in question impugned judgment dated 
02.02.2017 passed by learned Division Bench of Lahore High Court, 
Lahore. 
2. 
 
The facts culminated into filing of the instant petition are that 
the petitioner was booked in case bearing FIR No.365/06 dated 
03.11.2006 offence u/s 302/34 PPC registered with Police Station Darya 
Khan, District Bhakkar.  
Jail Petition No.382/2017 
Munir Akhtar @ Munir Ahmad vs, The State 
2 
 
 
 
As per contents of the crime report, it is alleged that the 
petitioner committed murder of Tariq Mehmood brother of complainant 
and Muhammad Abu Bakar son of Noor Muhammad. Motive behind the 
occurrence was that Mst. Tahira Parveen real sister of accused 
Muhammad Ilyas @ Lasha had contracted marriage with Tariq Mehmood 
deceased without consent of her brothers. The petitioner was taken into 
custody on 12.03.2012. During course of investigation, recovery of 
Kalashnikov was affected from him on 31.01.2010. During course of 
investigation, he was found fully involved in the case and as such, his 
name was placed in column No.3 of the report u/s 173 Cr.PC. The challan 
of the case was sent to court. The learned trial court vide judgment dated 
27.06.2013 convicted the petitioner u/s 302(b) PPC and sentenced to 
death. He was also burdened with compensation of Rs.1,00,000/- u/s 544-
A Cr.PC and in default thereof, he was to suffer six months S.I. Benefit of 
section 382-B Cr.P.C. was also extended.  
3. 
 
The judgment of the learned trial court was challenged 
before learned High Court through Criminal Appeal No.310-J/2013 
whereas the learned trial court sent the Murder Reference bearing 
No.208/2013 u/s 374 Cr.PC. The learned High Court while maintaining the 
compensation but altered the sentence from death to imprisonment for life. 
Hence, the instant petition for leave to appeal. 
4. 
 
At the very outset, it is argued by the learned counsel for the 
petitioner that in fact, both the courts below had not taken into 
consideration the evidence available on record and the same has not 
been evaluated according to the principles of “appreciation of evidence” 
enunciated by the superior courts from time to time. Contends that due to 
vague motive, the petitioner has been roped against the actual facts and 
circumstances and even the same was alleged against co-accused 
Muhammad Ilyas alias Lasha. Contends that the presence of the 
Jail Petition No.382/2017 
Munir Akhtar @ Munir Ahmad vs, The State 
3 
 
witnesses of ocular account at the place of occurrence at the relevant time 
is doubtful.  Contends that there is no report of Forensic Science Agency 
regarding the Kalashnikov is available on the record. Finally, it has been 
prayed that the leave to appeal be granted on this aspect.  
5. 
 
We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner at length 
and gone through the record.  
 
 
There is no denial to this fact that the instant occurrence has 
taken place in broad daylight in which two persons were done to death in 
a brutal manner. It is an admitted fact that the occurrence has taken place 
at 12.50 p.m. whereas the matter was reported to the police at 03.15 p.m. 
on the same day whereas the inter-se distance between the place of 
occurrence and police station is one kilometer. The facts and figures 
narrated above, rules out any possibility of deliberation and consultation. 
The petitioner was saddled with responsibility of causing firearm injury 
with Kalashnikov on the person of deceased Abu-Bakar which hit on his 
chest, back, backside of head and different parts of the body whereas the 
injuries sustained by other deceased Tariq Mehmood are attributed to co-
accused Muhammad Ilyas alias Lasha, who was convicted by the learned 
trial court and later on, the offence was compounded to his extent. The 
ocular account in this case is supported by Muhammad Saeed (PW10) 
and Khalid Mehmood complainant (PW-11), the statements of the 
prosecution witnesses coincide with each other on salient features of 
prosecution version. The ocular account is corroborated by the medical 
evidence. The petitioner remained absconder for more than five years and 
four months and he was arrested on 12.03.2012 and during the course of 
investigation, the petitioner was found involved and his name was placed 
in column No.03 of the report u/s 173 Cr.PC. All these factors when 
evaluated conjointly it is abundantly clear that the prosecution has 
succeeded to establish case without any reasonable doubt. The learned 
Jail Petition No.382/2017 
Munir Akhtar @ Munir Ahmad vs, The State 
4 
 
High Court while handing down the judgment impugned before us has 
already taken care of all established principles of law and converted the 
sentence of death into imprisonment for life which seems to us appropriate 
and in accordance with law. A very close scrutiny of evidence available on 
the record and while evaluating the same, we are of the considered view 
that there is no scope for interference into the judgment handed down by 
the learned trial court and modified by the High Court. As this petition is 
devoid of any legal justification hence, the same is dismissed. Leave to 
appeal is declined. 
 
JUDGE 
 
 
 
JUDGE 
Islamabad, the 
08.10.2020 
Approved for reporting 
*Athar* 
