ABDUL HAMEED DOGAR, J.--- This petition is directed against judgment, dated 14-12-2005 passed by a learned Division Bench of High Court of Balochistan, Quetta whereby Criminal Appeal No,98 of 2003 filed by petitioner Abdul Rauf was dismissed, his conviction was altered to 302(b), P.P.C., and sentence of death awarded by the trial Court was maintained as Tazir. His conviction and sentence under section 324, P.P.C. To seven years' R.I. With direction to pay Rs,1,00,000 as Arsh to complainant was also maintained. Murder Reference No,11 of 2003 forwarded by trial Court for confirmation of death sentence was answered in affirmative.
2. Briefly, stated the facts of the case are that on 9-2-2000 complainant Fouzia Ajmal lodged F.I.R.
No,75 of 2000 at Police Station Satellite Town, Quetta stating therein that on the fateful day at about 10-30 p.m. Petitioner came to her house and sat with her husband and started talking about his sister and brother-in-law. After serving tea she went to offer Isha prayer. She further stated that at that time her two minor daughters Paris and Hubab Faizeen were sleeping in their room whereas her servant Karim Tajik was present in the side room. Petitioner went to the bathroom as soon as she finished her prayer she saw petitioner coming out of bathroom carrying a silencer fitted pistol and fired at her husband, he also fired at her but pistol did not go off whereupon he inflicted pistol blow on her head due to which she fell down on sofa set, petitioner dragged her to kitchen by pulling her hairs where he took a knife and slew her throat due to which she became semi- unconscious, thereafter petitioner went to the upper storey of the house and she heard scrams of her daughters. On gaining conscious she came out of the kitchen and saw dead bodies of Ajmal and Karim. She went to the upper storey where she found dead bodies of her daughters.
3. The motive behind the occurrence was that petitioner complained about the unhappiness of his sister to deceased Muhammad Ajmal who is brother of brother-in-law of petitioner who did not listen but instead insulted him.
4. After registration of case petitioner was not arrested and was declared as proclaimed offender.
On 13-1-2001 petitioner was arrested and after usual investigation he was sent up to face trial.
5. On autopsy on the dead body of Muhammad Ajmal, on 23-4-2000, P.W.10 Dr. Sarfraz Jamali, Medical Officer found the following injuries:--
(1) Circular wound of entrance 1 c.m. In diameter, on right side of epigastria region of abdomen;
(2) Bid deep incised wound on right side of neck up back of right side of neck.
(3) Bid deep incised on left side of anteriolateral aspect of neck.
(4) Crush injury on occipital region of skull with brain matter out of bone fractured.
(5) Multiple incised wounds on right ear and back of right ear.
' On the same day, the said Medical Officer also found the following injuries on the dead body of Paras Faizeen:--
(1) Ligature mark (strangulation) present around the neck 1/2 c.m. In width.
(2) Ligature marks present around both wrist joints and ankle joints.
(3) Face and lips are cyanosed. Forth present from mouth.
' On the same day, the said Medical Officer also found the following injuries on the dead body of Hubab Faiszeen aged 12 years:
(1) Legation mark (strangulation) present around the neck 1/2 c.m. In width.
(2) Legation marks present around both wrist joints and above both ankles.
(3) Tongue slightly protruded.
(4) Blood stains from both nostrils.
(5) Face and lips are cyanosed.
(6) Bruise 2-1/2 c.m. x 2-1/2 c.m. On right cheek below eye, laterally.
' On the same day, the said Medical Officer also found the following injuries on the dead body of Muhammad Karimullah son of Shairul Vakil:--
(1) Triangular lacerated wound 2-1/2 c.m. x 2-/12 c.m. On right side of forehead.
(2) Lacerated wound 2 c.m. x 1/2 c.m. Bone deep on left temporal region of skull.
(3) Lacerated wound 2 c.m. x 1/2 c.m. Bone deep above injury No,2.
(4) Legation mark around the neck, 1/2 c.m. In width.
(5) Six lacerated 3 wounds on occipital region of skull, all are bone deep 6 c.m. x 1/2 c.m. To 8 c.m. x 1 c.m. In circumference bone is clinically fractured.
(6) Three lacerated wounds on dorsal aspect of right hand 2-1/2 to 1/2 c.m. In circumference.
(7) Face is swollen.
' On the same day, the Medical Officer also medically examined injured Fouzia Ajmal and noted the following injuries on her person:--
(1) Incised wound about 3 c.m. x 1/2 c.m. Muscle deep, bloodstained on back of right wrist joint with two parallecusts.
(2) Lacerated wound on left side of forehead 3 c.m. x 1/2 c.m. Deep up to bone blood-stained.
(3) Incised wound on right anterilateral aspect of neck 7 c.m. 1/2 muscle deep, blood-stained.
(4) Three lacerated wounds, 1 c.m. 1/2 c.m. Muscle deep with swelling each with on dorsal aspect of left hand.
(5) Incised wound between thumb and index finger of right hand 1-1/2 c.m. x 1/4 c.m. Muscle deep blood-stained.
(6) Lacerated wound 4 c.m. 1/4 c.m. Muscle deep blood-stained on middle of frontal region of skull.
(7) Incised wound on left occipital region of skull behind left ear, 2 c.m. x 1/4 c.m. Muscle deep blood-stained.
(8) Incised wound parallel to injury No,7, 1-1/2 c.m. x 1/4 c.m. Muscle deep.
(9) Big incised wound on back of left side of neck 10 c.m. x 1 c.m. With bleeding.
(10) Z shaped lacerated wound 5 c.m. x 1/2 c.m. Deep upto bone, blood-stained on left parietal region of skull.
(11) Incised wound parallel to injury No,9, 10 c.m. x 1/2 c.m. Muscle deep, blood-stained.
(12) Crush injury on occipital region of skull, 12 c.m. x 3 c.m. Deep upto bone.
(13) Lacerated wound on left occipital region of skull 4 c.m. x 1/2 c.m. Deep upto bone, blood- stained.
(14) Circular wound 1 c.m. In diameter on right arm, with echymosis and two small circular back cuts.
(15) Lacerated wound (gunshot) with black margins on lateral aspect of right side of chest, lateral aspect of right breast 2 c.m. x 1 c.m. In diameter.
(16) Lacerated wound blow injury No,15, 3 c.m. x 1/4 c.m. Muscle deep.
(17) Lacerated wound below injury No,16, 2-1/2 c.m. x 1/4 c.m. Muscle deep.
6. In order to prove its case prosecution examined 15 witnesses in all.
7. The petitioner in his statement recorded under section 342, Cr.P.C. Denied the case of prosecution and claimed innocence. He did not opt to give statement on oath as required under section 340(2), Cr.P.C. But produced Tahir Naeem (D.W.1), Dr. Abdul Sattar (D.W.2) and Sabeel Rehman (D.W.3) in his defence.
8. On conclusion of trial, petitioner was convicted and sentenced under section 302(a), P.P.C. To death. He was also convicted and sentenced under section 324, P.P.C. For causing injuries to complainant and to suffer seven years' R.I. He was also directed to pay Rs,1,00,000 as Arsh to the complainant.
9. On appeal, the learned High Court vide impugned judgment altered the conviction of the petitioner from 302(a), P.P.C. To 302(b), P.P.C. But maintained the death sentence.
10. We have heard Mr. Arshad Ali Ch. Learned Advocate Supreme Court on behalf of petitioner and Mr. Mehmood Raza, Additional Advocate-General, Balochistan on behalf of State and have gone through the record and proceedings of the case in minute particulars.
11. It is mainly contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that the impugned judgment is erroneous untenable in law, unjust and is based upon conjectures and surmises. He further contended that F.I.R. Was prepared after deliberation and prosecution has not proved the case against the petitioner and benefit of the same has to be extended to the petitioner. The police has shown arrest of the petitioner from Quetta but he was actually arrested from Karachi which means that the prosecution version is not credible and showing false arrest of the petitioner from Quetta.
He further contended that statement of sole witness was not properly appreciated by the learned trial Court as well the learned High Court which resulted in miscarriage of justice. He also stated that murder of four persons shows that the. Number of culprits was more than one and possibility cannot be ruled out that the eye-witness might have been screening someone by putting whole blame on the petitioner. He further contended that there is contradiction between the ocular and medical evidence. He stated that broken wrist watch and pair of spectacles show that a scuffle took place between the culprits and the deceased but nothing has been brought on record in this regard. Pistol and empties were sent to Fire-arm Expert after one year and two months, as such, report of fire-arm has lost its evidentiary value. He lastly contended that in the facts and circumstances of the case the death sentence is harsh and requires to be altered to imprisonment for life.
12. On the other hand Mr. Mehmood Raza, Additional Advocate-General, Balochistan supported the, impugned judgment and stated that petitioner has acted in a brutal manner and committed murder of four persons and caused several injuries to complainant, therefore, does not deserve any leniency in the sentence.
13. The prosecution in this case has been able to bring on record the testimony of complainant injured Fouzia Ajmal, who supported the case of prosecution as disclosed in the F.I.R. And whose testimony was found true, convincing and trustworthy by the trial Court and upheld by learned A High Court. We also did not notice any inherent defect in her evidence as she was subjected to lengthy cross-examination but nothing material was brought on record to doubt her veracity.
Complainant who herself received injuries deposed that on the fateful day at 10-30 p.m. Petitioner came to her house where her husband and other deceased were available. She while narrating the incident has categorically stated that petitioner not only committed murder of her husband Muhammad Ajmal but also caused murders of her daughters, namely, Paris and Hubab Faizeen and her servant Karim Tajik and also caused several injuries to her. She survived luckily and went to police station in semi-unconscious position. It is explicit that petitioner in his statement under section 342, Cr.P.C. While replying to question No,1 had admitted motive in clear words and stated that his younger sister was married to Afzal brother of deceased Muhammad Ajmal, and she was not happy, because she was not properly treated by her in-laws. He has not given any explanation with regard to his false implication but produced statement in writing wherein he took the plea of alibi and stated that on 20-4-2000 he went to Waggan where he felt pain in his abdomen and was taken to hospital where he remained admitted from 20-4-2000 to 24-4-2000 and was arrested from Gulf Hotel, Karachi on 7-1-2001. As such he admitted his abscondence and was arrested after about seven months of the incident which is a strong corroborative piece of evidence against him.
The defence witnesses are cooked one and are not proved relevant or trust worthy, therefore, their testimony was rightly rejected. When prosecution case and the defence version are put in juxtaposition, the former seems to be true and reliable and the latter is manipulated and managed one hence not relevant at all. In the event of proof of charge of Qatl-e-Amd, normal penalty under the law, is death and mitigating circumstances must be shown for taking a lenient view for the award of lesser penalty, which fact is lacking in the present case. Learned counsel for the petitioner though argued at length but could not point out any illegality, misreading or non-appraisal of evidence warranting interference in the impugned judgment. Since petitioner has committed murder of four innocent persons as such he was rightly convicted and sentenced to death on four counts. Irrespective of above, his conviction and sentence under section 324, P.P.C. To 7 years' R.I.
For causing injuries to complainant is also maintained.
14. Resultantly, the petition being devoid of force is dismissed and leave to appeal refused.