1. ' TANVIR AHMED KHAN, J.--- Leave to appeal is sought against the judgment, dated 17-10-2002 of a learned Division Bench of the Lahore High Court, Lahore, whereby Criminal Appeal No,106 of 1998 filed by the petitioner was dismissed and Murder Reference No,270 of 1998 sent by the learned trial Judge was answered in affirmative confirming his death sentence awarded by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Faisalabad, through his judgment, dated 3-2-1998 in a case emanated out of F.I.R. No,4 of 1995 registered on 2-1-1995 under sections 302/324/148/149, P.P.C. At Police Station, Jaranwala, District Faisalabad, for the murder of one Faqir Hussain.
2. ' The facts briefly narrated for the disposal of this petition are that aforesaid F.I.R. Was got recorded by Sana Ullah (P.W.9) stating that his deceased brother Faqir Hussain was running a grocery shop in the village. On the fateful day at 8-30 a.m. The deceased along with his brother Abad Ullah alias Chhinda (P.W.10) was present at the shop. In the meanwhile the petitioner along with his co- accused armed with deadly weapons emerged at the shop of Faqir Hussain and raised Lalkara that the latter should be taught a lesson for offering insult. They forcibly brought Faqir Hussain and Abad Ullah out of the shop in the street whereupon the petitioner fired at the former hitting on the backside of his neck. The co-accused inflicted injuries on Abad Ullah (P.W.10). The complainant, who was in the house adjoining to the shop of Faqir Hussain, reached at the spot and saw the occurrence. The miscreants made their escape good from the place of occurrence raising Lalkaras. The motive for the above occurrence was that young girls of the village used to visit the shop of the deceased in order to purchase commodities and the accused used to tease them. The deceased forbade the accused from doing so which resulted in the exchange of hot words on that very evening. Due to this the miscreants murdered Faqir Hussain complainant's brother and injured Abad Ullah (P.W.10).
3. ' After usual investigation challan of the case was submitted against the petitioner and his four co- accused. The prosecution examined 13 witnesses to establish its case. The present petitioner pleaded his innocence and stated as under:-- "I am innocent. Deceased Faqir Hussain was a handsome boy who had developed illicit relations with the daughters of Rana Tufail etc. Who was narcotics dealer. In the darkness of night they might have murdered but due to previous grudge and enmity I was falsely involved in this case and my brother."
4. ' The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Faisalabad, after evaluating the entire evidence brought on record through his judgment, dated 3-2-1998, convicted the petitioner under section 302, P.P.C.
5. And sentenced him to death with a fine of Rs,25,000 or in default to undergo two years' R.I. He was further directed to pay Rs,25,000 to the legal heirs of the deceased by way of compensation as envisaged under section 544-A, Cr.P.C. Or in default whereof to undergo six months' R.I. Co- accused Tanvir Ahmad and Hanif Shah were found guilty of causing injuries to Abad Ullah (P.W.10).
6. They were convicted under sections 337-A(ii) and 337-F, P.P.C. And were sentenced to five years and one year R.I. Respectively. They were also held liable to pay Rs,10,000 and Rs,1,000 to the injured and in default whereof they were to suffer six months and two months' R.I. Respectively.
7. Muhammad Saleem and Munir Ahmad co-accused were, however, acquitted by extending them the benefit of doubt.
8. ' The petitioner filed Criminal Appeal No,106 of 1998 before the Lahore High Court, Lahore, against his conviction and sentence while Murder Reference No,270 of 1998 was sent by the learned Additional Sessions Judge for confirmation or otherwise of the death sentence imposed upon the petitioner. A learned Division Bench of the High Court through its judgment, dated 17-10-2002 dismissed the appeal of the petitioner and answered the murder reference in the affirmative. Hence, this petition for leave to appeal.
9. ' We have considered the contentions advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the entire evidence brought on record with his assistance. A perusal of the record demonstrates that the F.I.R. In this case was recorded with promptitude. The occurrence is stated to have taken place at 8-30 p.m. While the F.I.R. Was lodged at 9-30 p.m. Describing all the details.
10. This expeditious registration of the F.I.R. Prima facie, established that the same was recorded without any deliberation and was absolutely free from any false implication. We have noticed that in order to prove its case the prosecution examined 13 witnesses. The ocular account has been narrated in its material particulars by Sana Ullah (P.W.9), Abad Ullah alias Chhinda (P.W.10) and Muhammad Ali (P.W.11). Abad Ullah (P.W.10) is an injured witness who was examined by Dr. Tahir Mahmood (P.W.6) on 2-1-1995 at 9-20 p.m. He found five injuries on his person. He is a natural witness and his presence at the spot cannot be ruled out in view of injuries Nos.1 and 2 on the head of the deceased which were grievous in nature with exposed bone. By no stretch of imagination those could be said to have been caused by friendly hands. The plea of the learned counsel that his statement by the Investigating Officer was recorded after a great delay is devoid of any force.
11. He could not be examined by the Investigating Officer earlier as it had come on record through the testimony of Investigating Officer that he could not record the same earlier as the witness, according to the opinion of the medical officer, was not fit to make a statement. The presence of the injured witness at the shop of the deceased cannot otherwise be ruled out being real brother of the deceased. He fully corroborated the deposition of the complainant Sana Ullah (P.W.9) in all its material particulars. Muhammad Ali (P.W.11) is totally an independent person. He has got no relationship with the deceased and nothing has been brought on record why this witness would implicate the petitioner falsely in a case involving capital punishment. He even does not belong to the Baradari of the deceased as he is Rajput by caste while the deceased and his other witnesses are Jatt. In spite of lengthy cross-examination defence side has not brought anything on record to shatter their testimony. Atta Ullah, D.S.P. Appeared as D.W.1. Respecting the petitioner he had stated that he was present at the spot but was empty-handed. No further evidence was brought from the defence side to substantiate their case. The medical evidence is totally in line with the ocular version as the fatal injury to the deceased has been attributed in categorical terms to the petitioner. As far as the recovery is concerned .12 bore gun was recovered at the instance of the petitioner while in the F.I.R. He was shown to have been armed with a rifle. This occurrence took place at the shop of the deceased and the miscreants dragged the deceased and his injured brother out of the shop whereafter they opened the murderous' assault which resulted into the death of Faqir Hussain and injuries to his brother Abad Ullah alias Chhinda (P.W.10). In this state of affairs it is expecting too much from a villager that he would be identifying the incriminating weapon in a meticulous manner particularly making out a difference between a rifle and a .12 bore gun. Even if the recovery is excluded from consideration, even then the confidence-inspiring ocular account of an unimpeachable character fully corroborated by the medical evidence and the motive bring us to an irresistible conclusion that the prosecution has successfully established its case against the petitioner.
12. ' Taking into consideration all the aforestated features of the case we do not find any justification to interfere in the well-reasoned judgment of the learned Judges of the Division Bench of the Lahore High Court whereby they have maintained the conviction and sentence recorded against the petitioner. As far as the plea of lesser sentence is D concerned, nothing has been brought on record to award the same. The deceased was a young student of M.A. The petitioner fired a fatal shot from his .12 bore gun on his neck which resulted into his death. We do not find any extenuating circumstance on record to award lesser sentence to the petitioner.
13. ' Resultantly for what has been stated, the instant petition as well E as above Jail Petition being without any merit are, accordingly, dismissed and .