| Case ID |
2e8a4461-a612-4918-9ca6-4f2dba7a5975 |
| Body |
View case body. Login to View |
| Case Number |
Criminal Appeal No. 38 of 1987 |
| Decision Date |
Dec 13, 1988 |
| Hearing Date |
Dec 13, 1988 |
| Decision |
The Supreme Court of Pakistan upheld the Lahore High Court's decision in Criminal Appeal No. 38 of 1987, dated December 13, 1988. The Court affirmed the conviction of Allah Ditta for the murders under sections 302 and 34 of the Penal Code, but modified his sentence from death to life imprisonment with a fine, citing mitigating circumstances related to family honour. The co-accused, Ghulam Shabbir, was acquitted based on insufficient evidence. The Court emphasized the importance of corroborative evidence and highlighted the discrepancies in the prosecution's case, ultimately ensuring a balanced and just application of criminal law. This decision reinforces the principles of fair trial and the necessity of concrete evidence in securing convictions, while also acknowledging the impact of personal motives in criminal behavior. |
| Summary |
In the landmark decision of Criminal Appeal No. 38 of 1987, the Supreme Court of Pakistan meticulously reviewed the case involving Allah Ditta and his co-accused Ghulam Shabbir. The appellant, Allah Ditta, was originally convicted under sections 302 and 34 of the Penal Code for the double murder of Ghulam Oadir alias Budhu and Amir Bakhsh. The prosecution presented a narrative of premeditated killings driven by Allah Ditta's suspicion of illicit relations between his wife and the deceased Budhu, invoking the cultural concept of family honour as a motive. However, the defense highlighted significant discrepancies in the prosecution's evidence, including contradictory witness testimonies and inconsistencies with medical reports.
The Supreme Court emphasized the necessity of robust and corroborative evidence in criminal convictions. While acknowledging Allah Ditta's confession, the Court balanced it against the lack of reliable corroboration from the prosecution's witnesses. The defense successfully argued that the absence of credible evidence and the presence of conflicting accounts warranted a reassessment of the initial convictions. Consequently, the Court altered Allah Ditta's sentence from the death penalty to life imprisonment, considering the mitigating factor of family honour, which reduced the severity of his punishment. On the other hand, Ghulam Shabbir was acquitted due to insufficient evidence proving his involvement beyond a reasonable doubt.
This case underscores the judiciary's commitment to ensuring justice through meticulous examination of evidence and adherence to legal principles. It highlights the challenges in cases where cultural motives intersect with criminal actions, necessitating a nuanced approach to sentencing. The decision also reflects the importance of the Penal Code in addressing murder cases, emphasizing sections 302 and 34, which pertain to punishment for murder and culpable homicide not amounting to murder, respectively.
Furthermore, the involvement of esteemed legal advocates, such as Abdul Rahman Tayyab and Ch. Muhammad Adam for the appellant, and Raja Abdul Ghafoor and Rao M. Yousaf Khan for the State, exemplifies the high-caliber legal representation critical in complex criminal appeals. The Supreme Court's ruling reinforces the integrity of the judicial system in Pakistan, ensuring that convictions are based on incontrovertible evidence and that penalties are proportionate to the circumstances surrounding each case.
In summary, the Supreme Court's decision in Criminal Appeal No. 38 of 1987 serves as a pivotal reference for future cases involving similar charges and cultural considerations. It underscores the judiciary's role in balancing the scales of justice, protecting individual rights, and upholding the rule of law through fair and equitable legal proceedings. This case not only resolves the immediate legal dispute but also contributes to the broader discourse on criminal justice, evidentiary standards, and the interplay between cultural norms and legal obligations in Pakistan. |
| Court |
Supreme Court of Pakistan
|
| Entities Involved |
Allah Ditta,
Faiz Muhammad,
Ahmad Bakhsh,
Ghulam Shabbir
|
| Judges |
NASIM HASAN SHAH,
GHULARN MUJADDID,
USMAN ALI SHAH
|
| Lawyers |
Abdul Rahman Tayyab, Advocate Supreme Court,
Ch. Muhammad Adam, Advocate-on-Record for Appellant,
Raja Abdul Ghafoor, Advocate Supreme Court,
Rao M. Yousaf Khan, Advocate-on-Record for the State
|
| Petitioners |
ALLAH DITTA
|
| Respondents |
THE STATE
|
| Citations |
1989 SLD 721,
1989 SCMR 715,
1989 SLD 1277
|
| Other Citations |
Not available
|
| Laws Involved |
Penal Code (XLV of 1860)
|
| Sections |
302,
34
|