KH. MUHAMMAD SHARIF, J.~ This judgment will disposed of Criminal Appeal No. 401/J of 2002 filed by Shahban, appellant who was convicted under section 303(b), PPC and sentenced to imprisonment for life with further direction to pay Rs. 1,00,000/-as compensation, in default R.I. For six months, vide judgment dated 4.6.2002 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Faisalabad.
2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that Mst. Perveen Bibi was married with one Anwar Ali about 25 years prior to the occurrence, which has taken place in-between the night of 24th/25th of September 2002. Out of the wedlock, three daughters and four sons were born. The whereabouts of aforesaid Anwar Ali were not known for the last 7 years, hence Mst. Perveen Bibi contracted second marriage with Shahban of Bahawalpur. The couple shifted to chak No.64/JB about 8 months prior to the occurrence. On 25.9.2000, Mst. Shagufta Bibi, daughter of (Mst. Perveen Bibi informed Liaqat Ali) complainant that her mother had been done to death by throttling by accused Shahban, Mustafa and Haider Ali. On that information, Liaqat Ali in the company of his father Ali Muhammad and brother Muhammad Ashraf reached chak No. 64/SB, Faisalabad. Mst. Shagufta told them that the accused Mustafa alias Masti had been demanding her hand from her parents to which Shahban consented but Mst. Perveen Bibi resisted. On account of that grudge, the three accused named above were alleged to have committed the murder of Mst. Perveen Bibi.
3. The investigation of the case was taken over by Zafar Iqbal Sub-Inspector (PW-10). He, after registration of the formal FIR, went to the place of occurrence, prepared injury statement Exh.PD, inquest report Exh.PE with regard to dead-body of the deceased, prepared rough side plan Exh.PF and on 30.10.2000, arrested Mustafa and Haider Ali. Shahban accused was arrested on 15.1.2001 by Faruq Ahmad ASI (PW-6). After completion of the investigation, all the three accused were challaned to face the trial. At the trial, prosecution in order to prove its case produced 10 witnesses in all. Statements of the accused were recorded under section 342, Cr.P.C, in which they pleaded falsie implication. Shahban also appeared under section 340 (2), Cr.P.C. After conclusion of the trial, Mustafa alias Masti and Haider AN were acquitted while Shahban, the present appellant was convicted and sentenced as stated above.
4. Ln support of this appeal, learned counsel submits that only eye-witnesses in this case is Mst.
Shagufta who is step daughter of the present appellant. Further submits that she has denied the motive part of the case before the Trial Court which, was stated in the FIR by the complainant on the asking of Mst. Shagufta. According to the learned counsel, there is no independent corroboration to the statement of said Shagufta. Lt is the case of the appellant that evidence of Liaqat Ali, complainant is based on hearsay and that Mst. Shahbam being married lady was residing at Badami Bagh Lahore and even her name was not mentioned in the FIR. Learned counsel lastly submits that prosecution having failed to prove its case against the appellant, he is entitled to acquittal.
5. Learned counsel for the State submits that Mst. .Shagufta is natural witness of the occurrence and there was no need on her part to depose falsely against the appellant and that since the motive remained shrouded in mystery, only for that reason, life imprisonment has been awarded to the appellant.
6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record with their able assistance. Ln the instant case, the motive given was that Mustafa alias Masti wanted the hand of Mst. Shagufta to which offer her father Shahban consented by Mst. Perveen Bibi resisted and due to that grade, she was murdered by Shahban, Mustafa and Haider Ali but she denied this motive which was tolled by her to complainant Liaqat (PW-9) before the Trial Court rather introduced a new motive by stating that accused was asking Mst. Perveen Bibi to accompany to Hasilpur but she refused upon which altercation took place and that due to ^ that grudge, Mst. Perveen was murdered.
The incident was reported to the Police at 3 p.m. On f 25.9.2000 with regard to an occurrence having taken place in-between the night of 24th/25th of September, 2000 though distance between the place of occurrence and the Police Station is 8 kilometres. Had the complaint been lodged at 3 p.m., as alleged by the prosecution, in column No. 3 of the inquest report, the time of information received by the I.O. Should have been mentioned but in the said column only date is given, ln the post-mortem report, no time of death and examination of dead-body of the deceased has been given.
The only eye-witness is Mst. Shagufta while the complainant Liaqat Ali had lodged the FIR on the report of Mst. Shagufta who informed him telephonically about the occurrence, ln the FIR, three persons namely AShahban, Mustafa and Haider Ali were named as accused. Both Mustafa and Haider Ali were acquitted by the Trial Court. No appeal against their acquittal has been filed either by the complainant or the State. There is no independent corroboration to the statement of PW-8.
Firstly, she stated that she informed her maternal uncle Liaqat complainant telephonically from one shop and in the same breath stated that she informed Liaqat from the house of a milk seller but she was even unable to disclose the names of said two persons.
7. Liaqat Ali, complainant PW-9 is not ah eyewitness of the case. What he stated either before the Police or the Trial Court,, was on the basis of information supplied to him by Mst. Shagufta (PW-8).
Liaqat Ali (PW-9) in his statement before the Police named three persons namely Haider Ali, Mustafa and Shahban as accused but in his cross-examination before the Trial Court, he named only; Shahban as an accused. This witness in his cross- examination also stated as under:- "I had named in, the FIR accused Mustafa alias Masti and Haider Ali, both present in Court, but all that was on account of suspicion. Both of them have purged themselves on Holy Quran and we have thereon got satisfied."
Mst, Shabnam Bibi (PW-7) the alleged eye-witness of the occurrence was real sister of Mst.
Shagufta PW-8 and was not named in the FIR to be an eye-witness of the occurrence. She is also not the resident of place of occurrence but being married lady at the relevant time was residing at Badami Bagh, Lahore.
During pendency of this appeal before this Court, an application seeking permission to compound the offence upon which a report was called for from the learned Sessions Judge. According to report of the learned Sessions Judge. Mahmood Ali, Shahid, Mst. Shabnam and Mst. Shagufta the major heirs of the deceased have got recorded their statements by stating that they have compromised the matter with the convict Muhammad-Shahban after having waived her right of cases. As to share of the minor legal heirs, diyat to their extent was not deposited so the appeal is being head on merits.
Having taken into consideration the over all facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the considered opinion that case of the prosecution against Muhammad Shahban, appellant is of doubtful nature. Resultantly, while allowing the benefit of doubt, appeal filed by Muhammad Shahban, appellant is accepted, conviction and sentence recorded against him by the Trial Court is set aside and he is acquitted of the charge. The appellant is in jail, He shall be released forthwith, if not required to be detained in any case.