اگر وجہ عناد (Motive) ثابت نہ بھی ھو تب بھی بہیمانہ قتل کا مجرم سزائے موت کا حقدار ھوگا۔ وجہ عناد (Motive) ثابت نہ ھوناہر مقدمہ قتل میں سزائے موت کو عمر قید میں تبدیل کرنے کی وجہ نہ ھے

 Weakness of motive or failure of prosecution to prove it, loses significance in a barbarous murder incident and the convict deserves no leniency in the quantum of sentence. The weakness of motive or failure of prosecution to prove it can admittedly be made basis for having resort to alternate sentence of imprisonment for life provided in Section 302 (b) PPC but such rule is not inflexible and deviation can be made from it if the deceased is done to death with display of brutality.

For deciding the quantum of sentence under Section 302 (b) PPC no statutory guidelines are given, thus each case is dependent upon the peculiar background and the manner in which a person is assassinated. In our view, homicide cases can be classified in two categories, out of which one pertains to incidents where persons are killed out of human frailty, morbid jealousy, loss of tamper or without display of brutality, etc. and the second class is of ferocious killing wherein innocent persons are assassinated in a savage manner. In the former class of cases, the Court can opt for the alternate sentence of imprisonment for life but in the latter category of cases the infliction of death sentence is warranted. The conversion of death sentence into imprisonment for life, in cases wherein an innocent person is slain by inflicting successive lethal injuries is nothing but extending mercy to a killer who displayed no clemency towards the victim, thus will be nothing but mockery of exercising the discretionary powers vested in a Court under Section 302 (b) PPC. The award of death sentence to the perpetrators of barbarous killings besides creating deterrence is also destined to console the legal heirs of the victim, to whom the Courts owe duty while administering justice. The term ‘just decision’ stands for a finding which is in conformity with the facts of the case and law on the subject giving what is due to a perpetrator in reference to the quantum and magnitude of aggression committed by him towards the victim. A decision can be termed as just only if it is based on rationality, correct interpretation of law and the conviction is in proportionate to the manner in which the crime is committed by the delinquent.

On the same analogy, it can inevitably be held that conversion of death sentence into imprisonment for life in a case of brutal killing can by no stretch be taken as justice in its true import and sense. The wrath of injustice falls on the litigants who further resort to bloodshed, effecting the society at large and create unrest. The maximum punishment in cases like the instant one, creates deterrence forcing the individuals to follow the law even if their rights are encroached upon or usurped by their adversaries. We are not oblivious of the fact that there is no dearth of murder cases in which the actual culprits are successful in getting rid of punishments due to insufficiency of incriminating evidence, false and tutored witnesses, defective investigations, overawing of witnesses in trials protracted with design and discrepant medical evidence furnished either due to lack of experience or with some sinister motive. We are leaned to hold that in a proved brutal murder case, the Courts must not display any reluctance for awarding sentence of death.

Criminal Appeal No.76 of 2020
(Muhammad Faisal Vs. The State & another) and Murder Reference No.14 of 2020
(The State v. Muhammad Faisal)
Date of hearing: 14.09.2022