' MUHAMMAD FARRUKH MAHMUD, J.--- This judgment will dispose of Criminal Appeal No,1071 of 2000 filed by Mansabdar alias Mansha and Zulfiqar sons of Muhammad Shafi alias Sakhi, who were convicted and sentenced by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jhang, vide his judgment, dated 9-6-2000 as under:-- ' Death with compensation of Rs,20,000 or in default six months' R.I. Under section 302/34, P.P.C.
' Murder Reference No,544 of 2000 for confirmation or otherwise of death sentence of appellants shall also be replied through this single judgment.
' During pendency of the instant appeal, Zulfiqar-appellant expired, therefore, Murder Reference as well as this appeal to his extent have become infructuous and disposed of as such.
2. Brief facts of the case as narrated in F.I.R. Exh.P.E. By Muhammad Arif complainant P.W.7 are that on the night of occurrence at about 9-15 p.m. He along with his brother Talib Hussain (P.W.8) and Muhammad Iqbal-deceased were proceedings towards a teashop for taking tea. Muhammad Iqbal was few paces ahead from them. All of a sudden Sarfraz, Zulfiqar both armed with daggers and Mansha armed with hatchet emerged there. Mansha accused raised Lalkara that Muhammad Iqbal should not be escaped on which Sarfraz and Zulfiqar accused inflicted dagger blows hitting Muhammad Iqbal on his left chest, upper part of abdomen, left iliac, hypogastrium, on the, ribs and right iliac fossa. Thereafter, Mansha accused inflicted two hatchet blows hitting Muhammad Iqbal on the left side of his head as a result whereof he fell down. In the meantime, Kamir son of Machia caste Umrana resident of Mauza Kauriana and other persons came there from the side of City. The complainant and the P.Ws. Raised hue and cry and witnessing the occurrence with their own eyes tried to catch hold the accused but all the three accused, while brandishing their weapons fled away from the spot.
' The, motive behind the occurrence was that sometime before, the complainant contracted marriage with Mst. Zareena sister of the accused against their consent, who was later on restored through Panchayat and the matter was compromised but the accused nourished grudge in their mind and having an opportunity committed offence.
3. After registration of formal F.I.R., the investigation of the case was taken over by Naeem Aziz, Inspector/P.W.9. He proceeded to place of occurrence and took into possession blood-stained earth from the spot vide memo. Exh.P.F. And prepared rough site plan Exh.P.K. Thereafter he reached Civil Hospital, took over the dead body, prepared injury statement Exh.P.D. And inquest report Exh.P.D./1. Due to transfer of P.W.9, the investigation of the case was entrusted to Muhammad Ashraf, S.-I./P.W.10, who on 23-7-1998 arrested Rab Nawaz, Zulfiqar and Mansha. On 27-7-1998, while in custody, Rab Nawaz led to the recovery of blood-stained dagger P.4, which was taken into possession vide memo. Exh.P.G. On the same day Zulfiqar led to the recovery of bloodstained dagger P.5, which was secured vide memo. Exh.P.H. Bloodstained hatchet was also recovered at the instant of Mansha on the same day and the same was taken into possession vide memo. Exh.P.J.
After' completion of investigation, the accused were sent up to face trial.
4. At the trial, the prosecution in order to prove its case produced 10 witnesses in all. The prosecution after tendering in evidence the reports of Chemical Examiner Exh. P. L. , Exh . P. M , Exh .
P. N. And Exh.P.P. And that of Serologist Exh.P.Q., Exh.P.R., Exli.P.S. And Exh.P.T. Closed its case. The accused in statements recorded under section 342, Cr.P.C. Pleaded their innocence. They did not appear as witness under section 340(2), Cr.P.C. After conclusion of trial and appellants were convicted and sentenced as stated above.
5. After having read the entire prosecution evidence, statement of the appellants recorded under section 342, Cr.P.C. And other relevant material available on record, the learned counsel for the appellants, at the very outset, has submitted that it is not a case of acquittal and has prayed for reduction in sentence stating that four real brothers were implicated in the case for causing murder of Muhammad Iqbal. Out of A four, Sarfraz died before commencement of trial and Zulfiqar died during pendency of the instant appeal, while Rab Nawaz was acquitted. According to the learned counsel the motive set down by the prosecution itself was that the complainant had eloped with sister of the accused, who could not forget this insult. The learned counsel has lastly argued that the fatal injuries were not attributed to the appellant Mansabdar alias Mansha.
6. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State has, however, supported the judgment passed by the learned trial Court and submitted that the appellant Mansabdar also contributed to the death of Muhammad Iqbal.
7. We have heard learned counsel for the parties at length and gone through the whole record carefully. According to prosecution case, Muhammad Iqbal was confronted by Sarfraz, Zulfiqar both armed with daggers and Mansha armed with hatchet. Mansabdar-appellant raised Lalkara that Muhammad Iqbal should not be spared. Thereafter Sarfraz and Zulfiqar caused repeated blows with daggers on the chest, flanks, buttocks and other parts of the body of Muhammad Iqbal.
Manshaappellant caused two hatchet injuries on the head of the deceased. After registration of case 4th brother of the accused namely Rab Nawaz was also implicated through supplementary statement. Sarfraz, who had caused dagger injuries to the deceased, lost his life prior to the trial, while Zulfiqar, who had also caused dagger, blows to the deceased, died during pendency of the instant appeal. Now we are left with Mansabdarappellant. Two injuries were attributed to him, which were caused on the head of the deceased. According to Dr. Abdul Aziz/P.W.6, who had conducted the post-mortem examination on the dead body of Muhammad Iqbal, the deceased received 11 injuries. Out of 11 injuries, 8 injuries were caused by a sharp-edged weapon. Injuries Nos.2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 were stab wounds, while injuries Nos.1 and 2, attributed to Mansabdar- appellant, were incised wounds. According to the Doctor's opinion, the deceased lost his life due to injury No,3, which caused rupture of left ventricle of heart and injury No,4, which caused out through and through to the left lobe of liver. Both these injuries undeniably are not attributed to the appellant.
8. Considering the motive and the opinion of the doctor, which shows that fatal injuries were not caused by the appellant, and the fact that the appellant has already lost two brothers, we while maintaining conviction of the appellant for offence under section 302(b), P.P.C. Reduce his sentence to imprisonment for life. However, the amount of compensation is enhanced to Rs,1,00,000, which would be paid to the legal heirs of the deceased. In case of non-realization or non-payment thereof, the appellant would suffer six months' S.I. (notice on this regard was given to the learned counsel for the appellant, who accepted it). Benefit of section 382-B, P.P.C. Is extended to the appellant.
9. With the above modifications in sentence and the amount of compensation, this appeal is partly allowed. Murder Reference is answered in the negative. Death sentence is not confirmed.