' IJAZ-UL-HASSAN KHAN, J.--- The appellant, namely, Ismail son of Tahir Jan, aged about 18/19 years, resident of Dhal Behzadi, District Kohat, was tried by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kohat, on the allegation of having, on 8-12-2002, at `Peskin Vela', in abandoned house of complainant Zahir Shah, in the precinct of Police Station Sadar, Kohat, committed murder of his aunt Mst. Rehman Bibi, wife of Zahir Shah complainant, with sharp-edged weapon. At the conclusion of trial, vide judgment, dated 3-11-2004, appellant was convicted under section 302(b), P.P.C. And sentenced to suffer life imprisonment with fine of Rs,1,00,000 and in default thereof to suffer S.I. For six months. The amount of fine, on realization was directed to be paid to legal heirs of the deceased, as compensation under section 544-A, Cr.P.C. Benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C. Was, however, extended to the appellant.
2. The appellant, feeling aggrieved, has filed Criminal Appeal No,937 of 2004, challenging his conviction and sentence.
3. The crime in question is alleged to have taken place on the date, time and the place of occurrence, mentioned above and he report about it was lodged the same day at 4-30 p.m., by complainant Zahir Shah, at Liaqat Memorial Hospital, Kohat and it was recorded by A.S.-I.
Muhammad Zaman (P.W.5).
4. Complainant Zahir Shah is driver and plies wagon on KohatPeshawar Road. On the fateful day, complainant had taken passengers to Peshawar. At `Peskin Vela' he was informed on telephone by his relative Tahir Jan that complainant's wife Mst. Rehman Bibi has been murdered and the dead body has been removed to hospital. The complainant hurriedly rushed to the hospital and found his wife lying murdered. On inquiry, he was informed that deceased has been done to death by Ismail nephew of the complainant.
5. Preceding registration of case, A.S.-I. Muhammad Zaman (P.W.5), prepared injury sheet Exh.P.W.2/1 and inquest Exh.P.W.2/2 of the deceased and referred the dead body to mortuary for post-mortem examination under the escort of H.C. Muhammad Sadiq (P.W.4). On receipt of copy of F.I.R., S.-I. Muhammad Hussain (P.W.12), proceeded to the spot and prepared site plan Exh.P.B. At the instance of complainant Zahir Shah. He took into possession blood-stained earth, printed `Chadie, stick and a spade, all stained with blood, vide recovery memo. Exh.P.C. He also took into possession last-worn clothes of the deceased, brought from the hospital, vide recovery memo. Exh.P.C./1. The clothes were sent to F.S.L. Peshawar. The report (Exh.P.Z.) was placed on the file. The accused was arrested on 12-12-2002. On the following day i,e, 13-12-2002, he was produced in the Court of Mr. Inamullah Wazir, (P.W.8), Civil Judge/Judicial Magistrate, Kohat who recorded his confessional statement. After completion, of investigation, Inspector Mushtaq Hussain (P.W.9) submitted challan against the accused in Court to face trial.
6. The prosecution, in order to prove the charge against the appellant produced in all 13 of whom, complainant Zahir Shah (P. W.10) reiterated the contents of the F.I.R. And nominated his nephew Ismail for the murder of his wife Mst. Rehman Bibi. Abdul Hamid (P.W.11) son of the complainant furnished eye-witness account of the incident.
7. Dr. Rifat Qureshi (P.W.13), Medical Officer, K.D.A., Kohat on 8-12-2003 at 3-30 p.m., conducted post- mortem examination of the deceased and noted a number of wounds on the forehead, top of the skull, right side of the head, below the chin and on left cheek, besides small abrasions and superficial wounds on neck and left shoulder, caused by tip of some sharp object.
' Probable time between injury and death was found 10 to 15 minutes and between death and post- mortem 3 to 4 hours.
8. The appellant on the conclusion of prosecution evidence was examined under section 342, Cr.P.C. He, in his statement, denied the charges and professed innocence. He did not opt to lead any evidence in his defence or appear himself as his own witness in terms of section 340(2), Cr.P.C.
9. The learned trial Judge, after hearing the parties and appraising the evidence, convicted and sentenced the appellant as mentioned and detailed above.
10. After having read the prosecution evidence on record, Mian Mohibulalh Kakakhel, Advocate, representing the appellant, submitted that the case against the appellant is totally of no evidence and the conclusions of the learned Court below on all crucial features of the case are imaginary and speculative rather than on solid tenable evidence. The learned counsel contended that it is a, laboured judgment, which is reflective of not only non-reading and misreading of evidence brought on record, but the same cannot stand the test of judicial scrutiny as the same is fanciful, artificial and against the weight of record. According to the learned counsel, the prosecution story, as given in the F.I.R., is unnatural and if Abdul Hamid (P.W.11) was present at the spot, he would have taken positive steps to intervene and save the life of his mother Mst. Rehman Bibi deceased. The learned counsel also questioned the legality of confessional statement and attempted to argue that same was outcome of third degree method. As regards the medical evidence, the learned counsel contended that the same does not support the prosecution in any manner because in the facts and circumstances of the present case, the statement of doctor only indicates the time, nature and seat of the injuries or at the most it may suggest the weapon used during the occurrence but in no way can point out the real culprit. The learned counsel further contended that F.I.R. Was lodged after delay which shows that P.Ws. Were not sure about the culprit and there was consultation and meditation. Concluding the arguments, the learned counsel contended that from whatever angle the prosecution evidence is looked at, it does not inspire confidence and, as such, the charge against the appellant cannot be held to have been proved beyond shadow of reasonable doubt. The learned counsel referred to the following authorities in support of his contentions:-- ' Khalid Javed and another v. The State 2003 SCM R 1419, Khuda Bux and another v. The Crown 1969 SCM R 390, Ashique Hussain Chandio v. The State PLD 1992 Kar. 5 and Asfandyar Wali v. The State PLD 1978 Pesh.
38.
11. Mr. Abdur Rauf Gandapur, Advocate, appearing on behalf of the State, controverted the contentions so raised and argued that it was a case of promptly lodged F.I.R.; that P.Ws. Had no enmity whatsoever, with the appellant so there was no question of his false implication and that the conclusion drawn and the reasons advanced by the trial Court show fair evaluation of evidence, which is in accordance with the settled principles in criminal cases.
12. We have heard at length the arguments of learned counsel for the parties and have also perused the record with their assistance. The prosecution in support of its case against the appellant has relied upon ocular account of the incident, confession of the appellant, recoveries from the spot and medical evidence. P.W. Zahir Shah complainant reiterated the contents of the F.I.R. And charged his nephew Ismail appellant for the murder of his wife. P.W. Abdul Hamid deposed that on the day of occurrence he was present in the house along with his mother, sister and brothers, when the accused came and knocked at the door. On opening the door, his mother asked the accused as to why he had come. The accused and his mother went to the adjacent house of the complainant, where altercation took place, in consequence whereof, accused hit his mother with the spade. She raised hue and cry. He went there and saw the accused standing with the spade in his hand. On seeing him, accused made good his escape. It was `Peshin Vela'. They removed the deceased to the hospital. Tahir Jan, father of the accused, informed the complainant regarding the occurrence.
13. The occurrence having taken place on 8-12-2002 at `Peshin Vela', the matter was reported to the police in Liaqat Memorial Hospital, Kohat with promptitude which rules out the element of fabrication. The oral testimony of complainant and his son remained sufficiently consistent. No material discrepancy could be brought on record during fairly lengthy cross-examination. The testimony is fully supported by the medico-legal and post-mortem report in addition to the recovery of blood-stained earth, blood-stained stick, spade and `Chadir' from the spot and positive report (Exh.P.Z.) of F.S.L. Peshawar. It may be noticed here that appellant is real nephew of the complainant. There is no previous or enmity between the accused and the complainant for false implication.
14. The prosecution case is further supported by the confession of appellant voluntarily made before the Judicial Magistrate, who appeared as P.W.8 and confirmed its voluntariness. There is no material to suggest that the appellant has been coerced or induced to make confessional statement. The facts brought out in the judicial confession find corroboration in material circumstances. There is no cavil with the proposition that if the confession was not confidence inspiring, the use of same to convict a person without independent corroboration is not proper and legal and the Courts generally refrain from passing the conclusion solely on retracted confession and while following the rule of abundant caution look to corroboration in -material particulars to ensure safe administration of justice. The Court, if is satisfied, that the confessional statement though retracted was true and voluntary, the same can safely be made basis of conviction.
Retraction per se, is not always a valid ground to discard judicial confession unless and until it is proved that it was obtained through coercion, threat, pressure or inducement. The details of event given by the appellant in confessional statement are strong circumstances to establish that confession was true and voluntary. This confessional statement is not only voluntary but also rings true and fits in the circumstances of the case and fully corroborated by the recovery of blood- stained earth, stick, spade and medical evidence furnished by Dr. Rifat Qureshi. There is no reason to disbelieve this confession statement of the accused as no illegality has been committed by Magistrate while recording the same. We are fully satisfied that the fear of police was totally removed from the mind of the accused and the confession made by him was free from extraneous influence, such as the threat, promise or inducement.
15. In view of the above discussion, we find that the trial Court has recorded a well-reasoned judgment, based on correct appreciation of evidence on record and cannot be allowed to be interfered with by this Court. The appeal having been found destitute of force is dismissed and the impugned judgment is maintained.