' SARDAR MUHAMMAD ASLAM, J.---Rafaqat Hussain alias Phunna son of Muhammad Din condemned prisoner has preferred this appeal questioning his conviction recorded under section 302(b), P.P.C. And sentence to death by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sialkot. He was also directed to pay Rs,20,000 as compensation to the legal heirs of the deceased, in default whereof he would have to serve six months' R.I. Vide judgment dated 26-1-2001 in case F.I.R. No,155 dated 2-5- 1999 registered under section 302, P.P.C. At Police Station, Philora, Tehsil Pasrur District Sialkot.
2. The case was re-registered on the complaint of Muhammad Saleem at Police Station, Philora, Tehsil Pasrur for an offence under section 302, P.P.C., wherein it is stated that his wife Mst. Mubarika Begum went to the house of one Abid Hussain, resident of Moza Dogranwali Tehsil Pasrur. On 2-5- 1999, he was informed that the appellant accused has injured his wife by inflicting Churri blow, whereupon he went to the house of said Abid Hussain and when he reached near Lari Adda, he saw the said Abid Hussain taking his wife in injured condition on a vehicle along with another person, whereupon he took his wife to Allama Iqbal Memorial Hospital, Sialkot and the doctor after examination of his wife prepared the Medico-legal report. He was informed by the said Abid Hussain that the accused at about 6-00 a.m. On 2-5-1999 had inflicted Churri blows to his wife who was sitting on a cot for causing her murder and Mst. Asia, the sister of Abid Hussain by giving Danda blows to the accused, made him to run away. The motive behind this occurrence was that the accused suspected his wife to have instigated the father of the accused for not transferring the land in his name. Case was originally registered under section 324, P.P.C., but the injured thereafter succumbed to the injuries in the hospital, whereupon the offence under section 302, P.P.C. Was substituted on 9-5-1999 instead of section 324, P.P.C.
3. Challan was submitted before the learned trial Court. Charge was framed against the accused who pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. The prosecution was directed to produce its evidence.
P.W.1, Nisar Ahmad stated that on 2-5-1999 the police in his presence took into possession the blood-stained clothes P.1, P.2 and P.3 through recovery Memo. Exh.P.A. And on the same day also collected the bloodstained earth, which was also taken into possession in his presence vide recovery memo.'Exh.P.B. He is also the witness of recovery memo. Containing last-worn clothes of the deceased vide Memo. Exh.P.D. Shahid Mehmood, P.W.2 is a witness of recovery of P.6, which was blood-stained, recovered on the pointation of the appellant accused vide recovery memo. Exh.P.Q.
P.W.3 is Dr. Zaib-unNisa, who examined the injured and corroborated the MLR issued by her. Dr. Ghulam Mustafa is P.W.4, who deposed that he on 8-6-1999 conducted the postmortem examination on the dead body of the deceased and stated that Exh.P.F is the correct carbon copy of the post-mortem examination. P.W.5 is Shahbaz Ahmad, constable. He handed over one sealed parcel said to contain blood-stained earth along with a docket for onward transmission to the office of Chemical Examiner, which was deposited in the said office intact. On 28-6-1999 Moharrir of the P.S. Again handed him over one sealed parcel said to contain Chhurri along with a docket for onward transmission to the Chemical Examiner, which he deposited the same intact. P.W.6, Muhammad Anwar, Head Constable is the witness of handing over the sealed parcels to P.W.S. P.W.7 is Dr. Fauzia Rashid, who on the application marked by M.S. Of the Hospital conducted external examination of the deceased. In her opinion all injuries were anti-mortem and caused by sharp-edged weapon. She supported the post-mortem report Exh.P.H. And diagram Exh.P.H./1 and Exh.P.H./2, which are correct carbon copies of the same. P.W.8 is Muhammad Yousaf, A.S.-I., who drafted the F.I.R. Exh.P.J./1 after receiving the complaint Exh.P.J. P.W.9 is Muhammad Anwar constable who took the dead body to the hospital for autopsy. P.W.10 is Masood Ahmad Bhatti, Draftsman, who prepared the site-plan Exh. P .K. And Exh. P.K . / 1 , P.W. 11 Umar Saleem is the complainant of the case, who supported the prosecution story. P.W.12 is Mst. Asiia, who is an eye- witnesses of the occurrence and supported the version of the complainant. P.W.13 Abdul Aziz, another eye-witness of the occurrence also supported the complainant. P. W.14 is Akbar Ali, S.-I., who investigated the case, found the accused guilty and challaned him.
4. After conclusion of prosecution evidence statement of the accused under section 342, Cr.P.C.
Was recorded. He claimed himself to be innocent. He also produced defence witnesses D.W.1, Muhammad Saleem and D.W.2, Jafar Hussain. He himself entered in the witness-box to disprove the allegation levelled against him. The learned trial Court after hearing both the parties passed the above said conviction and sentence.
5. The learnea trial Court alsoSubmitted Murder reference for confirmation of death sentence.
6. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the record.
7. The ocular account has been furnished by P.W.12, Mst. Asia step-sister of the appellant and Abdul Aziz P.W.13.
The occurrence took place in the house of Abid Hussain. Mst. Asia was an unmarried and was residing in the said house, so she was a natural witness of the occurrence. She had given a danda blow on the head of the appellant to save Mst. Mubarika deceased from his clutches. The factum of causing Danda blow is supported by medical evidence P.W.4 Dr. Ghulam Mustafa, who examined the appellant and found healed scar 1.5. c.m. x 3.5. c.m. Vertex portion of scalp. After the incident, the appellant ran away from the occurrence and was arrested on 7-6-1999. He was medically examined on 8-6-1999 the very next day of his arrest. Abdul Aziz P.W.13 resides in the same street.
Admittedly, he has no enmity with the appellant or any relationship even remotely with any of the side. He too deposed that the occurrence took place in his eye-sight. He was attracted on hearing the cries from inside the house and saw the appellant giving Chhurri blows to a woman sitting on a cot in the courtyard of the house. Mst. Asia the other eye-witness caused a Danda blow on his head whereafter he ran away from the spot. In cross-examination, P.W.13 stated that his house is located in the same street at a distance of 7/8 houses from the place of occurrence. Both the eye- witnesses remained unshaken in cross-examination. They withstood the test of cross-examination and their statements appears to be trustworthy, reliable and confidence inspiring. There could be no reason at least for P.W.12, Mst. Asia the step-sister to falsely implicate or substitute the appellant for the real culprit. No reason has been advanced by the appellant's learned counsel to discard the eye-witness account. Rather he went on to argue that the occurrence took place on a sudden affair calling for a lesser penalty.
8. The motive for the occurrence is an apprehension in the mind of the appellant of not being given his share of the land by the father at the instance of Mst. Mubarika deceased. The appellant himself appeared as D.W.3 and stated that he had no dispute with his father regarding land. He stated that Abid Hussain his step-brother, his father and Mst. Asia had converted to the Ahmadi faith. The conversion took place at the instance and under influence of Mst. Mubarika deceased who was also a Ahmadi by faith. She was visiting house of Abid Hussain and on certain occasions had delivered him by way of gift, Refrigerator, T.V. And a Motorcycle. On conversion of family members and the father of the appellant to Ahmadi faith, he had real apprehension of being disinherited which was the main cause of trouble and the motive behind the occurrence. Din Muhammad being the owner of land could retain the same till his death. On his conversion to Ahmadi faith, the appellant would not have succeeded to his estate being a Muslim. That was the reason of his persistent demand for transfer of land in his four during his lifetime. His grievance against Mst.
Mubarika was that she persuaded them for conversion. He intended to take revenge from her considering that the family is under her influence and during her lifetime, he may not be able to get the land transferred in his favour. Plea of the learned counsel for the appellant that the appellant might have killed the deceased under grave provocation because she had converted his entire family into Ahmadi faith is without substance and merit. Had it been so he would have at least warned his father and other family members to desist from conversion. He even never raised any objection to this effect. He had not attacked any other member of the family. This demonstrates his clear intention of securing land by all means during lifetime of Din Muhammad; failing which he would have been disinherited. Conversion did not take place on the day of incident. The appellant was well aware of the conversion. The plea of sudden occurrence on a supposed plea of grave and sudden provocation is ruled out of consideration. It is a planned murder. The appellant was full of venom. He caused successive injuries on the person of the deceased and ensured that she may not survive.
9. The medical evidence furnished by Dr. Zaib-un-Nisa, who medically examined the deceased in injured condition and that of Dr. Fouzia Rasheed, P.W.7, who conducted the post-mortem examination corroborate the ocular account.
10. The appellant led to the recovery of blood-stained Churri, weapon of offence on 10-6-1999 in the presence of Shahid Mahmood P.W.2 and Javed Ahmad (given up). He deposed that the appellant led to the recovery of weapon of offence buried by him in the ground under a Peepal tree. It was a blood-stained. He signed the recovery Memo.
11. The Investigating Officer appearing as P.W.14 corroborated the statement of P.W.2. The recovered Chhurri was sent to the office of Chemical Examiner who found the same blood-stained vide his report Exh.P.U. Serologist opined that the said weapon of offence was stained with human blood.
The recovery therefore, corroborates the prosecution case.
12. The prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubt against the appellant who has brutally murdered a helpless woman by c causing successive Churri blows on her person. Article 20 of the Constitution protects the religion and every citizen has right to profess, practice and propagate his religion and to establish, maintain and manage its religious institutions.
' For what has been discussed above, we are of the view that the prosecution has established its case against the appellant beyond any reasonable shadow of doubt. We maintain his conviction and sentence of death is confirmed. The appeal of the appellant is therefore, dismissed.
' The murder reference is answered in the positive.