| Case ID |
22fe9a23-45ba-4e4f-be7a-96afd1d2d9c6 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
1108 of 1999 |
| Decision Date |
|
| Hearing Date |
Mar 19, 2002 |
| Decision |
The Lahore High Court, after hearing Criminal Appeal No. 1108 of 1999 on 19th March 2002, maintained the conviction of Neimat Ullah Khan under sections 302 and 34 of the Penal Code (XLV of 1860). However, the court reduced his sentence from death to imprisonment for life due to the appellant being a teenager at the time of the offense and the prosecution's failure to establish a clear motive. The trial court's decision regarding compensation was largely upheld, with a correction in the period of imprisonment in case of non-payment of compensation. |
| Summary |
In the landmark decision of Criminal Appeal No. 1108 of 1999, heard on 19th March 2002 by the Lahore High Court, Neimat Ullah Khan was acquitted of the more severe sentence initially imposed by the trial court. The case revolved around charges under sections 302 and 34 of the Penal Code (XLV of 1860), pertaining to murder and related offenses. Neimat Ullah Khan, the appellant, contested the death sentence awarded by the Special Judge, S.T.A. Court No.1, Mianwali, arguing that he was a minor at the time of the incident and the prosecution failed to conclusively establish a motive. The affidavit presented by the prosecution included evidence from eye witnesses and medical reports that supported the occurrence of the crime and its circumstances. However, during the appeal, significant attention was given to the appellant's age, with Neimat claiming he was 17 years and 4 months old during the offense, supported by his birth certificate, although disputed by the prosecution who alleged the document was forged. The Lahore High Court acknowledged the lack of substantial evidence on the motive and the appellant’s teenager status, leading to the reduction of his sentence from death to life imprisonment. This decision underscores the judiciary's consideration of mitigating factors such as the defendant’s age and the necessity for clear motive in criminal convictions. The ruling also corrected an error in the compensation period stipulated by section 544 A, Cr.P.C., adjusting the imprisonment period for non-payment of compensation from five years to six months. Lawyers representing the appellant, including Asghar Khan Rokhari, emphasized the absence of credible motive and the questionable credibility of the prosecution’s witnesses. The court found the prosecution’s evidence sufficient to uphold the conviction but recognized the importance of leniency in sentencing due to the appellant’s young age. This case highlights significant aspects of criminal jurisprudence, particularly relating to the assessment of evidence, the impact of the defendant's age on sentencing, and procedural correctness in legal documentation and compensation orders. The involvement of experienced legal counsels, along with robust cross-examination of witnesses, played a critical role in the court's decision-making process, ultimately resulting in a balanced judgment that reflects both judicial firmness in holding the appellant accountable and compassion in consideration of his youthful status at the time of the offense. The case stands as an example of the legal system’s capacity to adapt sentencing based on individual circumstances and evidentiary strength, promoting a fair and just conclusion in the face of complex criminal allegations. |
| Court |
Lahore High Court
|
| Entities Involved |
The State,
Neimat Ullah Khan,
Asghar Khan Rokhari,
Nazeer Ahmad Qureshi,
Abdul Rasheed Moman
|
| Judges |
Mian Muhammad Najam Uz Zaman,
M.A. Shahid Siddiqui, JJ
|
| Lawyers |
Asghar Khan Rokhari,
Nazeer Ahmad Qureshi,
Abdul Rasheed Moman
|
| Petitioners |
Neimat Ullah Khan
|
| Respondents |
The State
|
| Citations |
2002 SLD 1051,
2002 PCRLJ 1972
|
| Other Citations |
Not available
|
| Laws Involved |
Penal Code (XLV of 1860)
|
| Sections |
302,
34
|