1. WAHIDUDDIN AHMAD, J.-Petitioners Sarjeet and his nephew Khurshid were tried for the murder of Amir Hassan and for inflicting simple injuries with blunt weapon to Yasin P. W. 8 on the 24th January 1967, in the area of Karor Town in the District of Muzaffargarh. Khurshid was convicted under section 304, P. P. C. And sentenced to ten years' rigorous imprisonment. Sarjeet was convicted under section 323, P. P. C., and was sentenced to three months' rigorous imprisonment, by the Additional Sessions Judge, Muzaffargarh, on the 12th February 1968. This order was challenged in Criminal Appeal No. 164 of 1968, which was dismissed on the 1st December 1969.
2. The prosecution case is that sometime before the occurrence, the petitioners approached Amir Hassan deceased, Masita P. W. And Yasin P. W. And requested Masita to give the hand of Mst.
3. Asghari, his daughter, to one Rafiq, the were's brother of Sarjeet petitioner, but this request was turned down. They again approached Masita with the same request but it was again not accepted.
4. It is alleged that on the day of occurrence, Yasin P. W. And Amir Hassan deceased, who were present in the lane opposite to the house of Yasin, were again approached by the two petitioners with the request that they should go on their behalf and request Masita to give the hand of his daughter Mst. Asghari in marriage with Rafiq. P. W. Yasin refused to oblige them and the talk between them developed into an altercation which resulted in a scuffle. Amir Hassan deceased intervened but Khurshid petitioner, on the incitement of Sarjeet petitioner, whipped out his knife and gave a blow with it to Amir Hassan in his abdomen. Yasin was rescued by one Bahadur who was not produced at the trial. Amir Hassan was carried to the Civil Dispensary in the Town. The doctor informed the police about the incident and asked them to record his statement. Haq Nawaz P. W.
5. 10, Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police Station Karor, reached the Dispensary and recorded the statement of the deceased, Exh. P. F., which was finished at 6-55 p.m. This statement was thumb- marked by the deceased. A formal F. I. R. Was registered under section 307, P. P. C. In the Police Station at 7-15 p.m. The condition of Amir Hassan deteriorated at midnight and the deceased died in the. Dispensary at about six in the morning. The petitioners were arrested on the 25th January 1967. On the 26th January 1967, Khurshid petitioner got knife, Exh. P.1, recovered from an earthen bin in his room. - The Serologist found that the knife was stained with human blood.
6. The conviction of the petitioners is based on the statement of the eye-witnesses P. W. Yasin and P.
7. W. 9 Hanif. Yasin is the real brother of Msita P. W. 3 and Hanif is his maternal uncle's son. The corroborative evidence is the knife, Exh. P.1, produced at the instance of Khurshid petitioner.
8. Khawaja Sultan Ahmad, learned counsel for the petitioners, has urged that there is ample evidence on the record to show That the occurrence in question took place sometime late in the night and that the petitioners have been falsely implicated for the murder of deceased Amir Hassan and for causing injuries to P. W: 8 Yasin. In this connection the learned counsel referred to the evidence on the record which shows that at midnight time the police was called for recording the statement of the deceased. He also contended that the shirt and the clothes which the deceased was wearing have not been produced and, therefore, the conviction of the petitioner Khurshid is not based on proper appreciation of the evidence. These contentions were also raised before the High Court and were repelled. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioners, we are satisfied that the evidence on the record established beyond doubt that the deceased was examined by Dr. Khalid Shervani at 5-30 p.m. And there is a note to this effect in the medico-- legal report that the police had been informed at about 6-30 p.m. It is further in evidence that P. W. Yasin was examined by the doctor at about 7-45 p.m. These circumstances clearly indicate that the occurrence had taken place at 5-00 p.m. The mere fact that the police was called at midnight for recording the statement of the deceased would not show that the police was not called earlier at about 6-30 p.m. The contention of the learned counsel that there was no need to call the doctor for the second time has no force. The police might have been called for the second time because the doctor thought that it may be necessary to record the statement of the deceased for the second time who was about to die.
9. The failure of the prosecution to produce the shirt which the deceased was wearing is not fatal to their case. The contentions raised by the learned council for the petitioners are at most in the nature of appreciation of evidence. We have gone through the record and are satisfied that the conclusion reached by the Courts below calls for no interference. The petition is dismissed.