' ABDUL HAMEED DOGAR, J.--- This appeal with the leave of Court is directed against the judgment, dated 18-9-2002, whereby learned single Judge of the Lahore High Court, Lahore had dismissed the appeal of the appellants and maintained their convictions and sentences under section 302/34, P.P.C. To imprisonment for life. A's regards the sentence in default of payment of compensation of Rs,1,00,000 to, the legal heirs of deceased, it was reduced to 6 months' S.I. However, benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C. Was extended to them.
2. Brief facts of the case are that on 9-12-1997 at about 9-00 a.m., an F.I.R. No,790 of 1997 was lodged at the behest of the complainant Muhammad Amin, that during the preceding night his brother Muhammad Munir alias Bagga slept for the care of cattle after tethering them in the cattle-shed. The complainant awoke up and went to the cattle-shed at about 4-30 a.m. And called his brother but did not receive any response and saw in the light of burning a match that his brother Muhammad Munir was lying on a cot smeared with blood who had four bullet injuries on his chest and was found dead.
3. During investigation, police recovered blood-stained earth and an empty bullet and a led bullet, last-worn clothes of deceased i,e, Shalwar, Qameez and Sweater and prepared such memos.
4. During investigation conducted by Sheikh Bashir Ahmed, D.S.P. P.W.13, appellants were arrested on the basis of statement of Bashir Khan, P.W.6 along with Abbas Khan (given up P.W.), who saw them lastly coming out of the house of the complainant on 9-12-1997 at about 2-30 a.m. While they were going to mosque for offering Tahajjad prayer.
' Recoveries of pistols along with bullets were effected from the possession of appellant Zafar Iqbal and Azhar which were not sent to Forensic Science Laboratory.
5. At trial, prosecution examined as many as 12 witnesses. On autopsy, Dr. Zulfiqar Ahmed M.O.
P.W.13 found the following injuries on the person of deceased:-- "(1) A fire-arm lacerated wound of entry 2 c.m. x 2 c.m., skin .Deep with aberrant collar on front of chest, on left side 4 c.m. From the clavical and 10 c.m. From the midline of the body.
(2) A fire-arm lacerated wound of entry measuring 2 c.m. x 1 c.m. With aberrant collar skin deep on front of the chest on left side, 5 c.m. From the mid line of the body.
(3) A fire-arm lacerated wound of entry measuring 2 c.m. x 2 c.m. With aberrant collar going deep on the front and left side of the chest, 6 c.m. From the clavicle and 3 c.m. From the mid line of the body.
(4) A fire-arm lacerated wound of entry measuring 2 c.m. x 2 c.m. With aberrant collar going deep on front and left side of the chest, 10 c.m. From the clavicle 2 c.m. From the mid line of the body.
(5) A fire-arm lacerated wound of entry measuring 2 c.m. x 2 c.m. Skin deep with aberrant collar on the right side of the abdomen 6 c.m. From the umbilicus, horizontally.
(6) A fire-arm lacerated wound of entry measuring 2 c.m. x 2 c.m. With aberrant collar going deep on the right side of the abdomen, 8 c.m. From the umbilicus, horizontally.
(7) A fire-arm lacerated wound of exit measuring 3 c.m. x 2 c.m. With averted margins on back of the chest on left side, 7 c.m. From the mid line of the body.
(8) A fire-arm lacerated wound of exit measuring 3 c.m. x 2 c.m. With averted margins on backside of abdomen on right side at the level of Ll, 4 c.m. From the mid line of the body."
6. Learned A.D.A., closed the prosecution evidence after tendering report of Chemical Examiner, Exh.P.Q. Report of Serologist Exh.P.R. Report of F.S.L. Exh.P.S. In evidence.
7. In statement recorded under section 342, Cr.P.C., the appellants denied the case of the prosecution and claimed innocence. They however, did not examine themselves on oath and also produce any evidence in defence.
8. We have heard Dr. Babar Awan and have gone through the record and the proceedings of the case in minute particulars.
9. It is mainly contended by learned counsel for the appellants that in this case the conviction has been based only on joint extra-judicial confession made by the appellants which is defective in law and is not corroborated by any other piece of evidence. In support, he relied upon the cases reported as The State v. Kamal Khan alias Maloo and another 1993 SCM R 1378 and Wazir Muhammad and another v. The State 2005 SCM R 277. He also pointed out that learned Single Judge in High Court who convicted the appellants on the basis of joint-extra-judicial confession, has taken a different view in the case of Maqsood Ahmad and others v. The State 2005 YLR 1128. He submitted that the last-seen evidence furnished by Bashir Khan P.W.6, has been disbelieved by the Courts below. Even the recoveries have been disbelieved as the same were not sent to Forensic Science Laboratory for examination report.
10. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State controverted the contentions and argued that the prosecution has successfully proved the case against the appellants.
11. We have given anxious thought to the contentions and agree with the arguments advanced by.
Dr. Babar Awan. This Court in the case of the "State v. Kamal Khan alias Maloo and another" as referred (supra) has disbelieved extra-judicial confession made by the accused being a joint confession and maintained the acquittal of the accused. Similarly, Shariat Appellate Bench of this Court in the case of Wazir Muhammad referred (supra) has also disbelieved the extra-judicial confession and has acquitted the accused on the ground that it was a weak type of evidence and requires strong corroboration. We have also gone through the case of Maqsood Ahmed referred (supra), whereby learned same Judge of the High Court has acquitted the accused giving him the benefit of doubt while disbelieving the joint extra-judicial confession and other similar circumstances.
12. Accordingly, we are of the opinion that prosecution has failed to prove the case against the appellants. The appeal is allowed, convictions and sentences of the appellants is set aside. They shall be released forthwith if not required in any other case.