Where an Accused is Responsible for a Single Fatal Shot, a Lesser Sentence may be Justified --- Lahore High Court converted Death Sentence to Life Imprisonment 

Islamabad 28-03-2025: The Lahore High Court has commuted the death sentence of accused to life imprisonment in [Criminal Appeal No. 78420-J of 2019] and [Murder Reference No. 308 of 2019]. The decision, delivered by a division bench comprising Ms. Chief Justice Aalia Neelum and Ms. Justice Abher Gul Khan, modifies the trial Court’s ruling, citing mitigating circumstances.

The accused was convicted for the murder of deceased following a dispute over agricultural land. According to the prosecution, on May 3, 2018, the appellant, along with co-accused, ambushed the complainant party to prevent them from irrigating the disputed land. During the altercation, accused fired two shots, one of which proved fatal, leading to his conviction and death sentence under Section 302(b) PPC by the Additional Sessions Judge (MCTC), Toba Tek Singh on September 30, 2019.

The case was brought before the Lahore High Court as an appeal filed by the convict, while the trial Court also forwarded a [Murder Reference No. 308 of 2019] for confirmation of the death sentence.

The Lahore High Court, after a thorough examination of the ocular, forensic, and medical evidence, upheld accused’s conviction but converted the death sentence to life imprisonment. The judgment emphasized the following key points:

1. The medical report confirmed that the deceased sustained only one fatal firearm injury, with the second injury being minor. The Court noted that a single shot could be treated as a mitigating factor under established legal precedents.
2. The defense claimed that accused acted in self-defense when the complainant party attempted to forcibly evict him from the land. However, this plea was raised late in the trial, contradicting earlier statements.
3. Crime empties recovered from the scene matched the firearm recovered from the appellant, further affirming his involvement in the shooting.
4. The dispute over agricultural land and pending civil litigation between a lady and the accused party was cited as the primary motive for the crime.
5. While eight co-accused were acquitted by the trial Court, the Lahore High Court ruled that this did not undermine the prosecution’s case against accused, as eyewitness testimonies remained credible and consistent.

The Court relied on Supreme Court precedents to justify reducing the sentence, noting that even the slightest mitigating factor could warrant converting a death sentence to life imprisonment. Citing cases such as Rehmat Khan Vs. The State (2017 SCMR 2034) and Dilawar Hussain Vs. The State (2013 SCMR 1582), the Court held that where an accused is responsible for a single fatal shot, a lesser sentence may be justified.

The Lahore High Court dismissed accused’s appeal against conviction but commuted his death sentence to life imprisonment, extending the benefit of Section 382-B Cr.P.C., which allows for the deduction of time already served from the total sentence. The Rs. 500,000 compensation to the deceased’s heirs, as imposed by the trial Court under Section 544-A Cr.P.C., was also upheld.

Powered by Froala Editor