Kh. Muhammad Sharif, J.--This judgment will dispose of Criminal Appeal No, 888 of 2001 filed by Muhammad Ramzan and six others, who were convicted and sentenced by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Layyah, vide his judgment dated 30.11.2001 as under :-- Muhammad Ramzan: Death with fine of Rs, 1,00,000/- under Section 302(b) PPC.
Hamind, Muhammad Aslam, Muhammad Suleman, Ghulam Yasin, Ghulam Abbas, Muhammad Amin and Muhammad Ramzan: Two years R.I. each with fine of Rs, 10,000/- each under Section 148 PPC or in default six months R.I. Mst. Naziran: Acquitted.
2. Murder Reference No, 859 of 2001 for confirmation or otherwise of death sentence of appellant shall also be answered through this single judgment.
3. Briefly, the facts of the case as narrated in FIR Ex. PA/1 lodged on the statement of Umar Hayat on 8.4.2001 are that he is labourer and in the year 1996 his first cousin Ahmad Bakhsh son of Muhammad Hussain caste Kumhar was married with Mst. Reshidan Bibi daughter of Allah Bakhsh caste Kumhar resident of Chak No, 396/TDA and in exchange of the above said marriage, Mst.
KaIsom daughter of Muhammad Hussain was married with Muhammad Suleman son of Allah Bakhsli. On the fateful day, at morning time, Mst. Kalsom Bibi was beaten by her husband and in- laws and her brother Muhammad Sharif had taken her to his house. At about 9:30 a.m. Muhammad Aslam, Hamind, Muhammad Amin, Ghulam Abbas, Mst. Naziran accused came to the house of Muhammad Hussain to take Mst. Rashidan Mai with them and the parties exchanged hot words.
The complainant further alleged that his father Haji Muhammad was Baildar of Canal Department who had restrained Muhammad Aslam etc. accused from fighting and he expelled them from the house of the uncle of complainant. After some time, complainant alongwith Haji Muhammad went towards Gola Adda and his brother Seed Ahmad came and informed him that Haq Nawaz Dulu and Fazil, the cousins of complainant, were calling them for the settlement of dispute which took place at the morning time on that day. On the said information, the complainant Umar Hayat PW-2 and his father Haji Muhammad deceased started for their house towards Gola Adda on bicycle. At about 12:30 Noon, they reached near the culvert situated in Chak No, 394/ FDA a Dalla came and stopped in front of them. Muhammad Ramzan armed with Churri, Hamind armed with hatchet, Muhammad Suleman and Muhammad Aslam armed with Lathis, Mst. Naziran, Ghulam Abbas armed with Churri, Ghulam Yasin armed with soli and Muhammad Amin armed with sota deboarded from the said Dalla. Mst. Naziran raised lalkara that they be murdered and thereafter all the accused attacked on PW-2 and Haji Muhammad. Hamind and Muhammad Amin started beating him with sotas while other accused gave fists and kick blows. Muhammad Ramzan attacked with his Churri but the complainant ran and saved himself. Ghulam Yasin gave a sota blows on the head of Haji Muhammad. Muhammad Ramzan gave a Churri blow which landed in front of chest of Haji Muhammad. After receipt of Churri blow, Haji Muhammad fell on the ground, Meanwhile, Khuda Bakhsh and Muhammad Ramzan arrived there and saw the occurrence and beseeched the accused. The accused alongwith their weapons went away towards their house.
Haji Muhammad succumbed to the injuries on the spot.
4. The motive behind the occurrence is that the accused had grappled with his uncle Muhammad Hussain etc. for the return of Mst. Rashidan Mai and the deceased had restrained the accused and expelled the accused from the house of his brother. The complainant loaded the dead body on the said Dalla and in the company of Khuda Bakhsh and Muhammad Ramzan PWs took the same to the RHC Hospital, Chowk Azam.
5. After registration of formal FIR, investigation of the case was taken over by Qazi Bashir Ahmad, SI/SHO/PW-9. He reached RHC Hospital Chawk Azam, took over the dead body of Haji Muhammad- deceased, prepared injury statement Ex. PJ and inquest report Ex. PK, Thereafter he proceeded to the place of occurrence and collected bloodstained earth vide memo Ex. PC, bicycle P-2, pair of Kanali Shoe P-3/1-2 and a turban P-4 vide memo Ex. PD. On 9.4.2001 the Investigating Officer took into possession the Dalla P-8, used during the occurrence, vide memo Ex. PF. All the accused except Mst. Naziran were arrested on 22.4.2001. While in custody, on 29.4.2001 Muhammad Ramzan accused led to the recovery of blood-stained Churri P-1, which was taken into possession vide memo Ex. PB. After completion of investigation the accused were sent up to face trial.
6. At the trial , the prosecution in order to prove its case produced 10 witnesses in all. After tendering in evidence reports of Chemical Examiner Ex. PO & Ex. PP and that of Serologist Ex. P0/1 and ,Ex. PP/1, the prosecution closed its case. In the statements recorded under Section 342 Cr.P.C. the accused pleaded false implication. After conclusion of the trial, the accused were convicted and sentenced as mentioned above.
7. After having read the entire prosecution evidence, statements of the appellants recorded under Section 342 Cr.P.C. and other relevant material available on record, the learned counsel for the appellants in support of its case submits that the parties are closely related to each other; 'that the appellants had sent Mst. Kalsoom Bibi to the house of her brother, while the complainant was not sending Mst. Rashidan Mai to the house of appellants, as there was Watta Satta marriage; that when the appellants went to get back Mst. Rashidan Mai from the house of complainant they were disgraced; that according to Doctor one single injury was caused on the person of the deceased and the second is swelling on the head. while Injury No, 1 on the person of Umar Hayat is swelling on the, left knee, Injury No, 2 is abrasion and Injury No, 3 is complain of pain; that according to FIR seven accused were armed with sotas and hatchets but there is no sharp edged weapon injury on the person of Umar Hayat, who is the only injured PW; that a wide net has been spread as eight persons have been involved in this case; and that mitigating circumstances exist in favour of Muhammad Ramzan-appellant, as the complainant party disgraced the appellants when they were not sending their daughter Mst. Rashidan Bibi to their house.
8. The learned counsel for the State assisted by learned counsel for the complainant, who has filed Criminal Appeal No, 11 of 2002 against acquittal of the respondents, submits that it was a case of unlawful assembly; that parties are known to each other; that appellants have murdered Haji Muhammad and also caused injuries to Umar Hayat, therefore, there is no mitigating circumstance in favour of Muhammad Ramzan-appellant, who has committed murder of Haji Muhammad with premeditation.
9. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record. We are of the opinion that a very large net has been spread; even Mst. Naziran mother of Muhammad Ramzan, since acquitted, was involved in this case. Ghulam Yasin caused one sota blow on the head of the deceased, therefore, we dismiss his appeal. He is on bail. He be taken into custody and sent to Jail to serve out the remaining sentence. The rest of the accused namely Muhammad Aslam, Muhammad Suleman, Ghulam Abbas have caused no injury to the deceased or any PW. Hamind and Muhammad Amin were alleged to have caused one sota blow each to the complainant. Those injuries are simple in nature. The occurrence had taken place in April, 2001, now we are going in 2006. As far as Muhammad Aslam, Muhammad Suleman, Ghulam Abbas, Hamind and Muhammad Amin are concerned, they remained behind the bars for nine months. We are of the opinion that the sentence which they have already undergone would meet the ends of justice. They are on bail. Their bail bonds are cancelled and the sureties are discharged. This disposed of the instant appeal to their extent.
10. Taking all the above noted factors into consideration, we though maintain the conviction of Muhammad Ramzan-appellant under Section 302(b) PPC but convert the same to imprisonment for life, with benefit of Section 382-B Cr.P.C. The sentence of compensation and in default thereof is, however, maintained in toto.
11. With the above noted modification in sentence, this appeal is also dismissed qua Muhammad Ramzan. Death sentence is not confirmed and the murder reference is replied in the negative.
12. The appeal against acquittal filed by Umar Hayat is also dismissed.