' SYED SAKHI HUSSAIN BOKHARI, J.---This judgment shall dispose of Criminal Appeal No,41-J of 2003 and Criminal Appeal No,113-J of 2005 as both these appeals have been filed against the same judgment (dated 18-6-2002 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jaranwala District Faisalabad).
2. Imdad Ali and Manzoor Ahmad have filed these appeals against the judgment dated 18-6-2002 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jaranwala whereby they were convicted under section 302(b), P.P.C. And sentenced to suffer imprisonment of life. They were also directed to pay Rs,25,000 each as compensation to the legal heirs of deceased under section 544-A, Cr.P.C. And in default whereof to undergo further six month's R.I. Imdad Ali was also convicted under section 337- F(iv), P.P.C. And sentenced to pay Rs,5,000 as Daman and to suffer four years' R.I. He was also directed to pay Rs,5,000 as compensation to Mst. Sumera Bibi P.W.
3. The prosecution story as appearing from the testimony of P.W.5, Muhammad Hanif (complainant) is that on 12-8-1999 at 6-30 p.m. He, Mst. Majeedan Bibi, Amjad Sohail, Muhammad Bashir and Muhammad Hanif were present at the 'Derbar' of Mallu Shah where Maqsood Ahmad, Imdad Ali, Abdul Ghafoor and Manzoor Ahmad while armed with 'Chhuries' also reached and raised 'Lalkara' that they will not leave Muhammad Bashir alive. He (complainant) was at a distance of 150 feet from Muhammad Bashir. Manzoor Ahmad gave 'Chhuri' blow on the right flank of Muhammad Bashir while Imdad Ali, accused gave 'Chhuri' blow on the back of his left hand. The complainant raised alarm whereupon Mst. Majeedan, Amjad Sohail and Mst. Samaira reached the spot Abdul Ghafoor accused gave 'Chhuri' blow to Mst. Majeedan Bibi whereas Maqsood Ahmad gave two 'Chhuri' blows on the arms of Amjad Sohail and Imdad Ali accused gave 'Chhuri' blow on the back of Mst. Sumera Bibi. Abdul Rasheed and Abdul Sattar reached the spot and accused fled away from the spot. Mukhtar Ahmad brought a car and they took Muhammad Bashir towards Hospital but he expired before reaching the hospital. One day prior to the occurrence Manzoor Ahmad and Imdad Ali accused had quarrelled with the deceased over pigeons and due to this grudge the accused attacked the complainant party and killed Muhammad Bashir. He went to the police post, Balochni and made his statement. Exh.P.E. Which was read over to him and he thumb-marked the same. The police reached the spot and collected blood-stained earth and the same was made into a sealed parcel vide Memo., Exh.P.D. Attested by him and Muhammad Anwar P.W.
' On 29-8-1999 Imdad Ali accused while in police custody led to the recovery of 'Chhuri' P.3 from his house. The 'Chhuri' was blood-stained and the same was made into sealed parcel and taken into possession vide memo. Exh.P.F. Attested by P.W.5 and Muhammad Anwar, P.W. On 10-9-1999 Manzoor Ahmad accused led to the recovery of 'Chhuri' P.4 from his house which was made into sealed parcel and taken into possession vide memo. Exh.P.G. Attested by P.W.5 and Muhammad Anwar, P.W. He had identified the dead body w the deceased at the time of P.M. Examination.
' P.W.11, Muhammad Anwar, S.-I. Is the Investigating Officer in this case. He stated that on 13-8-1999, Muhammad Hanif, complainant appeared before him and made statement, Exh.P.E., which was read over to him and he signed the same in token of its correctness. He sent complaint to the police station for registration of a case. The Investigating Officer reached the spot and prepared injury statement, Exh.P.J. And inquest report Exh.P.K. Of Muhammad Bashir deceased. He also prepared injury statement of Mst. Majeedan Bibi, Exh.P.L. And that of Mst. Samira injured P.W., Exh.P.C./1 and injury statement of Sohail AmjadExh.P.M. The Investigating Officer sent the dead body and the injured witnesses to the hospital for P.M. Examination and medical examination. He took into possession blood-stained earth from the spot and the same was made into a sealed parcel vide memo. Exh.P.D. The Investigating Officer recorded statements of witnesses and on his direction Aurangzeb draftsman .Prepared site plans, Exh.P.N. And Exh.P.N./1. He prepared rough site-plan of the place of occurrence Exh.PP. After the post-mortem examination, Nazar Muhammad constable produced before him last-worn clothes of deceased (Shalwar P.1 and Shirt P.2) which were taken into possession vide memo. Exh.P.A. On 29-8-1999 he arrested Imdad Ali and he got recovered 'Chhuri' P.3 from his house which was taken into possession vide memo. Exh.P.F. On 6-9-1999 he arrested Manzoor Ahmad got recovered 'Chhuri' P.4, which was taken into possession vide memo.
Exh.P.G. After completion of investigation he challaned the accused (Manzoor Ahmad, Imdad Ali, Maqsood and Abdul Ghafoor).
4. Imdad Ali and Manzoor Ahmad appellants and their co-accused appeared before learned trial Court and charge under sections 302(b)/34/337-F(i)/34, 337-F(ii)/ 34 and section 337-F(iv)/34, P.P.C. Was framed against them to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial whereupon prosecution evidence was recorded. The prosecution examined 13 witnesses in all to prove its case.
P.W.1 Kalyar Ahmad, constable took the parcel to the office of Chemical Examiner. P.W.2 Nazar Hussain escorted the dead-body to the mortuary for post-mortem examination. P.W.3 Dr. Muhammad Javed Asghar medically examined Amjad Sohail and Mst. Sumera P.W.4 Muhammad Anwar identified the dead body of deceased at the time of PM examination. P.W.5 Muhammad Hanif is the complainant in this case and what he stated in his examination-in-chief has already been noticed above. P.W.6, Abdullah Rashid, P.W.7, Mst. Majeedan Bibi and P.W.8, Mst. Sumera are eyewitnesses. P.W.9 Dr. Javed Iqbal conducted PM examination on the dead body of Muhammad Bashir, deceased and found following injuries on his person:--
(1) "An incised wound (stab wound) 3.5 c.m. x 1.5 on right litters wall of chest lower part slightly to posterior 19 c.m. Upward from anterior superior iliac spine and 20 c.m. Downward from right axilla.
On dissection it damaged skin muscles, right disgharam, liver, Abdominal and chest cavity having about 1 liter of blood.
(2) An incised wound 2.5 c.m. x 0.5 c.m. x skin deep on back of left fifth metacarpo pharyngeal joint.
Corresponding cut was present on Qameez.
' Rest all other structures were healthy except those mentioned in above injuries.
' Stomach was healthy with some amount of semi-liquid material.
' Small intestine was healthy with some semi-solid material. Bladder was healthy with some amount of urine.
' Opinion.
' In my opinion death in this case had occurred due to hemorrhage and shock, which was as a result of Injury No,1, which was sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature. Injury No,1 was fatal. Both Injuries Nos.1 and 2 were anti-mortem and was by sharp-edged weapon.
' Time between injuries and death was about one hour and between death and post-mortem was about sixteen hours."
' P.W.10, Muhammad Saeed, constable kept in Malkhana the sealed parcel and to contain blood- stained earth. P.W.11, Muhammad Anwar, S.-I. Is the Investigating Officer in this case and how he investigated the case has already been noticed above. P.W .12, Dr. Khalid Mehmood examined Mst.
Majeedan Bibi. P.W.13, Aurangzeb draftsman had prepared site plans Exh.P.N. And Exh.P.N./1.
Thereafter ADA tendered in evidence copy of F.I.R. Exh.P.E./1 and report of Chemical Examiner, Exh.P.S. And closed the prosecution case. The accused were examined under section 342, Cr.P.C.
Wherein they denied the allegations levelled against them by the prosecution and pleaded their innocence. However, accused did not produce any defence evidence. After hearing the parties learned trial Court convicted Abdul Ghafoor under section 337-F(i)(ii), P.P.C. Only and acquitted Maqsood Ahmad and convicted the appellants under section 302(b), P.P.C. And sentenced them as mentioned above. Hence these appeals by Manzoor Ahmad and Imdad Ali.
5. I have heard the arguments and perused the record.
6. As mentioned above, the prosecution case is that on 12-8-1999 at about 6-30 p.m. Appellants along with their co-accused (Abdul Ghafoor and Maqsood Ahmad) while armed with 'Chhuries' caused injuries on the persons of Muhammad Bashir, Mst. Majeedan Bibi, Mst. Sumera and Amjad Sohail, P.Ws. As a result of which Muhammad Bashir died. However, the case of appellants is that P.Ws. Have involved them falsely due to enmity and due to their relationship with the deceased. The prosecution examined four eye-witnesses (P.W.5 Muhammad Hanif, P.W.6, Abdul Rashid, P.W.7 Mst.
Majeedan Bibi and P.W.8 Mst. Sumera Bibi) and they have fully supported prosecution case. They are consistent in their statements that Manzoor Ahmad and Imdad Ali along with their co-accused while armed with 'Chhuries' caused injuries on the persons of Muhammad Bashir, Mst. Majeedan Bibi, Mst. Sumera Bibi and Amjad Sohail P.Ws. As a result of which Muhammad Bashir died. There is no material contradiction or discrepancy in their statements. Their statements are convincing and confidence-inspiring and there is nothing on record to disbelieve the same. The most important aspect of the case is that Mst. Majeedan Bibi and Mst. Sumera Bibi are injured P.Ws. There is nothing on record to show that injuries on their persons are self-suffered or with friendly hand. So presence of said witnesses at the scene of occurrence at the relevant time cannot be doubted. Even otherwise occurrence took place during daylight.
7. The prosecution case is that accused caused injuries on the persons of deceased and P.Ws. With 'Chhuries'. Prosecution examined three medical officers (P.W.3, P.W.9 and P.W.12) and they have fully supported prosecution story. So medical evidence conforms to the ocular account furnished by eye-witnesses. According to prosecution case 'Chhuries' were recovered from the appellants.
Prosecution has examined two witnesses (P.W.5 and P.W.11) to prove recovery of 'Chhuries'.
However, the 'Chhuries' were not sent to concerned offices to find out whether the same are stained with human blood or not. As such recovery of 'Chhuries' has no value.
8. As regards the defence version the same is not plausible. Even otherwise appellants have not examined any witness in support of their version. So there is ex parte evidence of prosecution. As such defence version is afterthought and baseless and the same is accordingly rejected. In these circumstances find that prosecution has proved its case against the appellants beyond any shadow of doubt. As regards the plea of learned counsel for the appellants that the sentence awarded to the appellants is on the higher side and accordingly calls for appropriate reduction, in my opinion there is no substance in the said plea. The sentence awarded by learned Court below is not on the higher side. The trial Court already appears to have taken lenient view of the matter. So learned trial Court has rightly convicted and sentenced the appellants (Imdad Ali and Manzoor Ahmad).
9. For what has been discussed above I am of the considered opinion that these appeals have no force and the same are accordingly dismissed.