IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PAKISTAN 
(Appellate Jurisdiction) 
 
PRESENT: 
Mr. Justice Mr. Manzoor Ahmad Malik 
Mr. Justice Mr. Sardar Tariq Masood 
Mr. Justice Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed 
 
 
 
Criminal Appeal Nos. 296-L & 297-L of 2020 AND  
Criminal Petition No.373-L/2016 
(Against the judgment dated 23.02.2016 passed by the Lahore 
High Court Lahore in Crl. Appeal Nos.2055/2010, 2142/2010 
and Crl. Rev. No.1348/2010 with M.R. No.135/2011)  
 
 
Akbar Ali 
(in Cr. A. No.296-L/2020) 
Muhammad Yousaf & 3 others 
(in Cr. A. No.297-L/2020) 
Muhammad Rashid 
(in Cr. P. No.373-L2016) 
 
 
…Appellant(s) 
 
 
 
 
 
Versus 
 
 
The State & another 
(in Cr. A. No.296-L & 297-L/2020) 
Akbar Ali & 5 others 
(in Cr. P. No.373-L/2016) 
 
 
…Respondent(s) 
 
 
For the Appellant(s): 
Mr. Azam Nazir Tarar, ASC 
 
Mr. Mudassir Chathha, ASC 
 
(in Cr.A.296-L & 297-L/2020) 
 
For the Petitioner(s): 
Mr. M. Qamar-uz-Zaman, ASC 
 
(in Cr.P.373-L/2016) 
 
For the State: 
Mr. Khurram Khan, 
 
Addl. Prosecutor General Punjab 
 
Date of hearing: 
21.10.2020. 
 
JUDGMENT 
 
 
 
    Qazi Muhammad Amin Ahmed, J.- The appellants, 
being members of an unlawful assembly, were tried by a learned 
Additional Sessions Judge at Lahore; they were indicted for homicide 
as well as murderous assault committed on 12.10.2005 at 2:00 p.m. 
within the precincts of Police Station Hadyara Lahore. Akbar Ali, 
appellant is attributed fatal shot to Abdul Hameed deceased, 35/36; 
Muhammad 
Shafique 
(PW-1), 
Muhammad 
Siddique 
(PW-2), 
Muhammad Shahid (PW-3), Faqir Hussain (PW-4), Muhammad Parvez 
(PW-5) and Haji Lal Din (PW-9), assaulted with multiple weapons, 
survived the assault. A previous brawl is cited as motive in the crime 
Criminal Appeal Nos. 296-L & 297-L of 2020 AND  
Criminal Petition No.373-L/2016 
 
 
 
2
report lodged by deceased’s father Haji Lal Din (PW-9). Accused 
claimed trial that resulted into their convictions on multiple counts 
vide judgment dated 30.09.2010; held guilty under clause (b) of section 
302 of the Pakistan Penal Code, 1860, Akbar Ali appellant was 
sentenced to death with a direction to pay compensation. The  
co-accused were convicted and sentenced for murderous assault upon 
the witnesses as well as injuries endured by them in consequence 
thereof. Separate appeals filed by the convicts were dismissed by single 
judgment dated 23.02.2016 with alteration of Akbar Ali’s death penalty 
into imprisonment for life; the co-convicts were let off from the charge 
of murderous assault, however, to the extent of injuries caused by 
them, direction for monetary compensation to the witnesses was kept 
intact. Still dissatisfied the convicts through leave of the Court have 
assailed the findings recorded by the High Court on the grounds that 
occurrence did not take place in the manner as alleged in the crime 
report and that after prosecution’s failure on extensively arrayed, 
coordinate charge of murderous assault, the entire edifice of the case 
stood seriously jolted and, thus, it would be grievously unsafe to 
maintain the conviction. Alteration of death penalty into imprisonment 
for life as well as acquittal on coordinate charges, have been challenged 
by Muhammad Rashid, petitioner, on behalf of his deceased father; it 
is argued that in a case of massive violence, proved to the hilt through 
the testimony of injured witnesses, there was no occasion for the High 
Court, either to alter penalty of death into imprisonment for life or let 
off co-accused from the charge of murderous assault merely for 
investigating officer’s failure to recover from the accused weapon used 
by them during the occurrence. A confidence inspiring ocular account 
free from all taints had constituted ‘proof beyond doubt’ that 
conclusively clinched the case, concluded the learned counsel.  
2. 
 
Heard. Record perused. 
3. 
 
Guilty verdict returned to Akbar Ali appellant, even on a 
most strict reappraisal, does not admit space to any exception; 
witnesses are unanimous on his having targeted the solitary fatal shot 
that cost Abdul Hameed life in his prime youth. A negative forensic 
report, nonetheless, seriously diminished consequentiality of the 
weapon recovered, a circumstance accompanied by prosecution’s 
failure to establish motive validly extenuated alteration of death 
penalty into imprisonment for life, a wage found by us, on our own 
independent analysis, as conscionable in circumstances.  
Criminal Appeal Nos. 296-L & 297-L of 2020 AND  
Criminal Petition No.373-L/2016 
 
 
 
3
 
Though except for Muhammad Anwar appellant/respondent, 
attributed a butt blow to Muhammad Shafique (PW-1), remainder of 
the accused are assigned solitary fire shot to the PWs on different parts 
of their bodies, nonetheless, given nature and locales of the injuries, 
the High Court viewed their lethality as being insufficient to attract the 
mischief of section 324 of the Code ibid, particularly in view of recovery 
of blunt weapons, preferred to saddle the assailants with monetary 
compensation, primarily provided for the violence endured by the 
injured, a view vehemently contested by the prosecution. Appellants/ 
respondents were arrested way back in the year 2005 and appear to 
have remained incarcerated for considerable period of time; much 
water has flown under the bridge and it would be thus inexpedient to 
reexamine and revisit the question of their culpability within the 
framework of their indictment, as prayed for by the prosecution. Period 
of incarceration and tribulation of lengthy trial and procedures of 
appeal have adequately remedied the wrong in circumstances, calling 
for no further action. Criminal Appeal Nos.296-L and 297-L of 2020 
fail. Dismissed.  
4. 
 
As a natural corollary, Criminal Petition No.373-L of 2016 
is dismissed and leave refused.   
 
 
 
Judge 
 
Judge 
 
 
Judge 
Lahore, the 
21st October, 2020 
Not approved for reporting 
Azmat/-