ASIF SAEED KHAN KHOSA, J. -- Anwar-ul-Haq, Muhammad Afzal and Boota appellants were convicted for an offence under section 302(b), P.P.G, for committing Qtl- e-Amd of Munir Ahmad deceased vide judgment dated 06.07.2001 handed down by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Faisalabad and were sentenced to death each and to pay a sum of Rs. 20,000/- each to the heirs of Munir Ahmad deceased by way of compensation under section 544-A, Cr.P.C, or in default of payment thereof to undergo simple imprisonment for six months each. Through the same judgment Mushtaq appellant was also convicted for an offence under section 302(b), P.P.C for committing Qatl-e- Amd of Munir Ahmad deceased and was sentenced to. Imprisonment for life and to pay a sum of Rs. 10,000/- to the heirs of the said deceased by way of compensation under section 544-A, Cr.P.C, or in default of payment thereof to undergo simple imprisonment for six months. The learned Trial Court had also convicted Boota appellant for an offence under section 302(b), P.P.C, for committing Qatl-e-Amd of Mst. Niaz Bibi deceased and he was sentenced to death on the count as well and was also ordered to pay a sum of Rs. 20,000/- to the heirs of the said deceased by way of compensation under section 544-A, Cr.P.C, or in default of payment thereof to undergo simple imprisonment for six months. Mushtaq, Zahid, Rashid and Shahid appellants were also convicted by the learned Trial Court for an offence under section 324, P.P.C, for launching a murderous assault upon Muhammad Hussain (PW-7) and they were sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for seven years each and a fine of Rs. 5,000/- each or in default of payment thereof to undergo simple imprisonment for six months each. Zahid and Rashid appellants were further convicted by the learned Trial Court .For an offence under section 337-D, P.P.C, for causing injuries to Muhammad Hussain (PW7) and they were sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for seven years each and to pay Arsh of Rs. 90,000/- each to the said injured victim. The sentences of imprisonment passed against Mushtaq, Zahid, Rashid and Shahid appellants were ordered by the learned Trial Court to run concurrently and the benefit under section 382-B, Cr.P.C, was extended to them. The learned Trial Court had, however, acquitted Muhammad Siddique and Mst. Nargis accused. All the above-mentioned convicts-appellants have challenged their convictions and sentences before this Court through the present appeal which has been heard by us alongwith Murder Reference No. 537 of 2001 seeking confirmation of the sentences of death passed by the learned Trial Court against Anwar-ul- Haq, Muhammad Afzal and Boota appellants and we propose to decide both matters together through the present consolidated judgment.
2. The prosecution's case unfolded in the FIR was that Mst. Muniran Bibi complainant was a resident of Chak No. 202/RB situated within the area of Police Nishat Abad, District Faisalabad and about thirteen years prior to the present occurrence her marriage was solemnized with Muhammad Hussain and thereafter she had been blessed with two sons and two daughters, In the morning of 02.08.1999 the complainant's children and the children of Anwar-ul-Haq appellant, an immediate neighbour of the complainant, had quarrelled with each other whereupon the ladies belonging to both the parties had also altercated with each other and had also resorted to a scuffle but the matter had been patched up by the residents of the locality. On;that occasion Anwar-ul-Haq appellant had also reached the spot and had issued a threat that he would avenge the insult of the ladies belonging to his party. Thereafter at-about 01.30 p.m. On the same day, i.e. 02.08.1999 the complainant, her husband namely Muhammad Hussain, her brother namely Munir Ahmad, her mother namely Mst. Niaz Bibi and her sister namely Mst. Nabila were chatting with each other while sitting on cots in the shade of some trees available in the ground of a school in front of the complainant's house when Anwar-ul-Haq appellant armed with a dagger, Mushtaq appellant armed with a chhurri, Shahid and Zahid appellants armed with a chhurri each, Rashed appellant armed With a dagger, Boota appellant armed with a dagger, Muhammad Afzal appellant armed with a dagger, Muhammad Siddique accused armed with a Dang and Mst. Nargis accused came there empty-handed while raising lalkaras that they would teach the complainant party a lesson for the insult of the accused-party. Anwar-ul-Haq appellant then gave a dagger blow below the right armpit of Munir Ahmad and, another dagger blow on the left shoulder of Munir Ahmad, Mushtaq appellant gave a chhurri blow on the chest of Munir Ahmad, Muhammad Afzal appellant gave a dagger blow in the abdomen and on the chest of Munir Ahmad and Muhammad Siddique accused gave a Dang blow on the head of Munir Ahmad above his left ear. When the complainant's mother namely Mst. Niaz Bibi went forward to separate the padies she was given a dagger blow by Boota appellant on her back.. Upon receipt of their injuries Munir Ahmad and Mst: Niaz Bibi fell on the ground. Zahid appellant then give chhurri blows to the complainant's husband namely Muhammad Hussain hitting him below his left armpit and below his left ribs. Rashid appellant then gave a dagger blow to Muhammad Hussain on his abdomen, Mushtaq appellant gave a chhurri blow on the right side of the hip-joint of Muhammad Hussain and Shahid appellant also gave many chhurri blows to Muhammad; Hussain which landed on different parts of his body.
The complainant's sister namely Mst. Nabila went forward in order to separate the parties but she was give a dang blow by Muhammad Siddique accused hitting her on her left upper arm. One of the legs of the complainant was incapacitated and Mst. Nargis accused caught her from the collar of her shirt and made her fell on the ground while raising lalkaras that nobody should be spared alive. The hue and cry raised by the complainant attracted Zulfiqar and Abdul Majeed PWs to the place of occurrence and many other men and women belonging to that village also saw the said occurrence. Upon seeing those persons having been attracted to the spot the appellants and their co-accused decamped from the place of occurrence while raising lalkaras. The motive set up in the FIR was that in the morning of the day of the present occurrence some children belonging to the parties had quarrelled with each other whereafter the ladies belonging to the parties had altercated and scuffled with each other and it was on the basis of that grievance that Anwar-ul- Haq appellant and his co-accused had launched a concerted attack upon the complainant party' with an intention to kill Muhammad Hussain, Munir Ahmad, Mst: Niaz Bibi and Mst. Nabila and had injured them with daggers, chhurris and a Dang. The injured persons were removed to Allied Hospital, Faisalabad by the complainant with the assistance of Zulfiqar and Abdul Majeed PWs. Mst.
Niaz Bibi succumbed to her injuries upon reaching the hospital and died. The complainant then remained busy in getting the injured victims treated at the hospital and then after leaving the dead-body in the hospital in the care of Zulfiqar and Abdul Majeed PWS she left for reporting the matter to the police but on her way she met a police officer at Pul Lasar,; at 05.05 p. m. On 02.08.1999 and made a statement before him in respect of the alleged occurrence. Formal FIR No. 408 was subsequently registered at Police Station, Nishat Abad, District Faisalabad at 05.30 p. m.
On 02.08.1999 for offences under sections 302/324/337-B/148/149, P.P.C. The injured victim namely Munir Ahmad also succumbed to his .Injuries and died later on in the hospital.
3. - The investigation of this case was conducted by Sefarish Hussain, SI (PW.l4) and during the investigation injury statements and inquest reports were prepared, the dead-bodies were dispatched to the mortuary for autopsy, the injured victims were got medically examined, the place of occurrence was respected, blood-stained earth was secured a rough site-plan of the place of occurrence Was prepared and statements of witnesses were. Recorded. After the postmortem examination of the. Dead-bodies the law-worn clothes of the deceased were secured and later on a formal. Site-plan of the place of occurrence was got prepared, the appellants and their co-accused were arrested and various blood-stained weapons were recovered from the possession of different appellants. Upon completion of the investigation a challan was prepared and submitted in connection with this case.
4. At the commencement of the trial the learned Trial Court framed a charge, with four heads under sections 302, 324, 337-B and 148/149, P.P.C, against the appellants and their co-accused to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed a trial.
5. During the trial the prosecution produced fifteen witnesses in support of its case against the appellants and their co-accused. Mst. Muniran Bibi complainant (PW 6), Muhammad Hussain (PW.7) and Zulfiqar (PW!8) furnished the ocular account of the incident in question. Mst. Muniran Bibi complainant (PW.6) and Muhammad Hussain (PW.7) also deposed about the motive.
Muhammad Saleem (PW.9) stated about recovery of various blood-stained weapons from the possession of different appellants during the investigation of this case. The medical evidence was, provided by Dr. Muhammad Saleem Chishti (PW.1) Dr. Yousaf Hassan (PW.2), Dr. Farah Naz (PW-5) and Dr. Sittara Jabeen (PW.l3), Safarish Hussain, SI (PW.14) stated about the various steps taken by him during the investigation of this case. The remaining evidence produced by the prosecution was more or less formal in nature.
6. In their statements recorded under section 342, Cr.P.C, the appellants and their co-accused denied and controverted all the allegations of fact levelled against them by the prosecution and professed their innocence. Some of the appellants advanced a plea of alibi. The appellants and their co-accused, however, opted not to make statements on oath under section 340(2), Cr.P.C, but they produced one witness in their defence who supported the plea of alibi advanced by some of the appellants.
7. Upon conclusion of the trial the learned trial Court acquitted the appellants' co-accused namely Muhammad Siddique and Mst. Nargis but after finding the prosecution's case against the appellants to have been proved beyond reasonable doubt it convicted and sentenced them as mentioned and detailed above. Hence, the present appeal and connected Murder Reference before this Court.
8. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record of this case with their assistance. At the outset the learned counsel for the appellants has informed us that Zahid, Rashid and Shahid appellants have already served out their sentences and they have already been released from the jail and, thus, this appeal has fructified to their extent. He has gone on to state that the only relief that he seeks from this Court is reduction of the sentences of death passed by the learned Trial Court against Anwar-ul-Haq, Muhammad Afzal and Boota appellants to imprisonment for life and that he does not challenge the convictions and the other sentences of all-the appellants recorded by the learned Trial Court. In this context he has submitted, that the occurrence in this case was a result of a sudden flare up without any premeditation on the part of the appellants. As against that the leamed counsel for the State have maintained in unison that the prosecution had succeeded in establishing the appellants' guilt to the hilt and, therefore, their convictions and sentences recorded .By the learned Trial Court do not warrant any interference by this Court. They have further maintained that the appellants had brutally done two persons to death and had caused injuries to two others with the help of daggers and churries and, thus, they do not deserve any sympathy in the matter of their sentences.
9. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and going through the record of this case with their assistance we have observed that the occurrence in this case had taken place in broad daylight and an FIR in respect of the same had been lodged with reasonable promptitude in the circumstances of this case. All the appellants had been clearly nominated in the FIR and specific roles played by them during the main incident had been detailed in the FIR with exactitude. The eye-witnesses produced by the prosecution, i.e: Mst. Muniran Bibi complainant (PW.6), Muhammad Hussain (PW 7) and Zulfiqar (PW.8) , were natural witnesses of the occurrence inasmuch as Mst.
Muniran Bibi complainant (PW.6) and Muhammad Hussain (PW.7) lived in a house which was situated opposite to the place of occurrence and Zulfiqar (PW.8) also resided in the same vicinity.
Muhammad Hussain (PW.7) had himself received many serious injuries on his person during the said incident and the stamp of injuries 0n his person .Vouchsafed his unmistakable presence during the incident in issue. All the eye-witnesses produced by the prosecution were closely related to both the deceased and to the injured victims and there was hardly any possibility for such witnesses to screen the real culprits and to falsely substitute them with the present appellants. The reason suggested by the defence tc these eye-witnesses during their cross-examination for false implication of the appellants was never established or substantiated through any independent evidence whatsoever. The said eye-witnesses had deposed quite consistently about the main occurrence. The discrepancies creeping into their statements made before the learned Trial Court were minor in nature and the same did not affect the main story of the prosecution and involvement of the present appellants in the main incident. The motive set up by the prosecution.
Had stood sufficiently established as Mst. Muniran Bibi complainant (PW-6) was personally involved in the same. During the investigation blood-stained daggers and chhurries had been recovered from the possession of the appellants and subsequently the Chemical Examiner and the Serologist had confirmed that the blood available on the recovered weapons was of human origin.
The medical evidence had provided sufficient support to the ocular account inasmuch as it had confirmed the date and time of occurrence, the weapons used and the locale of the injuries as stated by the eye-witnesses'. Slight variations found between the ocular account and the medical evidence regarding seats of some injuries have not been found by us to be of much consequence as we are conscious of the fact that in an occurrence of this nature and magnitude where many culprits give many injuries to many victims in quick succession there mathematical precision in keeping an audit and account ' I of all the injuries is not to be expected from the party under attack, In view of the natural and consistent ocular account provided by the eye-witnesses who had found sufficient corroboration from the motive and recoveries and support from the medical evidence the learned Trial Court have felt convinced that the prosecution had succeeded in establishing its case against the app- Hants beyond reasonable doubt and in- view of the observations made above we have not been able to take any legitimate exception to the said conclusion of the learned Trial Court and, thus, we have found the learned counsel for the appellants to be quite justified in not challenging the convictions and sentences of the appellants other than their Sentences of death.
10. We have carefully adverted to the matter of sentence of death passed against three of the- appellants but have remained unable to find any valid mitigating circumstance warranting reduction of their sentences of death to imprisonment for life. The parties to this case were immediate neighbours of each other and there was no' background of any serious enmity between them but over a trivial and petty dispute over quarrelling of children and altercation of womenfolk, which had been patched up by the residents of the locality, the appellants had launched a concerted attack upon an unarmed complainant party and had caused, as many as sixteen injuries to four persons belonging to the complainant party out of whom two had died as a result of the injuries received by them at the hands, of the appellants- The weapons used by the appellants and the seats of the injuries chosen by them clearly demonstrated that the appellants wanted to kill the members of the complainant party. The appellants had brutally butchered two persons and had seriously injured two others and apparently they had no legal or factual justification for doing that, In that backdrop the appellants do not deserve any sympathy in the matter of their sentences. The norma! Wages of a crime of murder is death and in the peculiar circumstances of this case Anwar-ul-Haq, Muhammad Afzal and Boota appellants deserved no less.
11. For what has been discussed above this appeal is dismissed as having become infructuous to the extent of Zahid, Rashid and Shahid appellants who have already served out their sentences and. Have since been released from the jail. This appeal is also dismissed to the extent of Anwar- ul-Haq Muhammad Afzal, Boota and Mushtaq appellants whose convictions and sentences recorded by the learned Trial Court are upheld and maintained.
12. Murder Reference No. 537 of 2001 is answered in the affirmative and the sentences of death passed by the learned Trial Court against Anwar-ul-Haq, Muhammad Afzal and Boota appellants are confirmed. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.