' TARIQ SHAMIM, J.--- Muhammad Akram appellant through this Criminal Appeal No,1120 of 2006 assails the judgment, dated 20-11-2000 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Faisalabad, whereby he convicted the appellant under section 302(b), P.P.C. And sentenced him to death with a further direction to pay an amount of Rs,20,000 as compensation to the legal heirs of the deceased as contemplated by section 544-A, Cr.P.C. And in default thereof to further undergo 6 months' S.I. Extending the benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C.
2. Briefly stated the facts of the case as gathered from the F.I.R. Exh.P.J./1 lodged by Muhammad Imran Azhar complainant (P.W.10) are that on 19-6-1999 in the morning time he along with his mother, brothers and sisters went to the house of his maternal-uncle (Mamu) Muhammad Sarwar (P.W.11) at Dausa, leaving behind his sister (Uzma Azhar) and father at home. The complainant along with his said maternal-uncle, leaving his mother, other brothers and sisters in the house of maternal- uncle (P.W.11), returned back to Faisalabad and reached home at about 2-30 p.m. When the complainant and his maternal-uncle entered the house of complainant they saw appellant Muhammad Akram giving dagger blows upon the chest of complainant's father after falling him on the ground and on seeing them the appellant raised a Lalkara that whosoever move forward he would be done to death and due to fear they did not try to apprehend the accused who brandishing the dagger in his hand vanished away from the scene. Thereafter, the complainant and his uncle Muhammad Sarwar P.W.11 enquired from Uzma Azhar who told that some time before the occurrence Muhammad Akram accused came in the house, caught hold her arm and tried to take her in a room to commit Zina with her but she resisted and due to the said noise her father Shaukat Azhar, who was sleeping in the Verandah, woke up whereupon Muhammad Akram accused left Uzrna Azhar and started scuffle with her father and gave blows with screw driver on his right shoulder and neck after picking the same lying nearby. Upon receiving injuries Shaukat Azhar fell down on the ground. The appellant then pulled a dagger from his "Nepha" and inflicted dagger blows on his chest, shoulder and around the neck at which point of time the complainant and Muhammad Sarwar P.W.11 reached the spot and saw the occurrence. Shaukat Azhar succumbed to the injuries at the spot.
3. Motive behind the occurrence as alleged was that the appellant was on visiting terms with the family of the complainant and he used to drop the complainant's sister namely Uzma Azhar in his rickshaw at college with whom on the day of occurrence the appellant tried to commit Zina and the deceased forbade him from doing so.
4. P.W.13 Sajjad Ali, S.-I. On 19-6-1999, after having received information reached the place of occurrence, recorded the. Statement Exh.P.J. Of Muhammad Imran Azhar complainant, sent the same to police station through Tariq Mehmood constable for registration of formal F.I.R. He prepared injury statement Exh.P.B., inquest report Exh.P.E. And sent the dead body of the deceased to the mortuary for post-mortem examination under the escort of Gulzar Ahmad No,3324/C, inspected the spot and prepared rough site plan Exh.P.M., took into possession blood-stained earth vide recovery memo. Exh.P.K., recorded the statement of P.Ws. Under section 161, Cr.P.C., and conducted raid for the arrest of the accused. On 20-6-1999 Gulzar Ahmad Constable No,3224/C produced before the Investigating Officer blood-stained clothes consisting of Shalwar P.1 along with post-mortem report which he took into possession vide recovery memo. Exh.P.A. The Investigating Officer called Aurangzeb draftsman who after inspecting the spot and on the pointation of the witnesses prepared site plan Exhs.P.H. And P.H./1. The Investigating Officer recorded his statement and that of Muhammad Arshad and Tariq Rafique P.Ws. Under section 161, Cr.P.C. On 27-6-1999 the Investigating Officer arrested the appellant and Uzma Azhar acquitted accused. On 28-6-1999 Muhammad Akram appellant led the police to the recovery of dagger P.2, and blood-stained clothes Shalwar P.3, Qameez P.4 from his house which were taken into possession vide memos. Exh.P.F. And Exh.P.G. Respectively. The Investigating Officer, prepared rough site plan regarding recovery of dagger and blood-stained clothes Exh.P.F./1 and Exh.P.G./1. On 19-6- 1999 on the pointation of Muhammad Akram appellant the Investigating Officer took into possession screw driver P.5 vide recovery memo. Exh.P.L. After completion of investigation Sajjad Ahmad Investigating Officer P.W.13 submitted challan against both the accused.
5. At the trial, prosecution in order to prove its case produced as many as 13 witnesses out of whom Dr. Javaid Iqbal Demonstrator Forensic Medicine, Punjab Medical College, Faisalabad who conducted post-mortem examination appeared as P.W.4 whereas eye-witness account was furnished by Imran Azhar complainant (P.W.10) and Muhammad Sarwar (P.W.11), Muhammad Arshad (P.W.9) narrated about the extra-judicial confession made by Uzma Azhar on 24-6-1999 before his family in his presence, Sajjad Ali S.-I. Who investigated the case appeared as P.W.13. Dr. Muhammad Ilyas C.M.O., DHQ. Hospital Faisalabad appeared as P.W.3 who on 28-6-1999 medically examined Muhammad Akram appellant and found rounded depressed scar 1/4 x 1/4 c.m. On bridge of nose upper part just left to the mid line and a scabbed abrasion about 4 c.m. x 1/2 c.m. In front of left leg about the middle. The rest of the evidence is of formal nature. The prosecution tendered in evidence report of Chemical Examiner Exhs.P.N., P.Q., Exh.P.R. And the report of the Serologist Exh.P.S., Exh.P.T. And Exh.P.U. And closed its case.
6. After closure of prosecution evidence the trial Court recorded the statements of Muhammad Akram appellant and acquitted co-accused Uzma Azhar under section 342, Cr.P.C. Who neither opted to appear as a witness in their defence under section 340(2), Cr.P.C. Nor produced any defence evidence. In reply to the question "Why this case against you?" the appellant stated as under:-- "The P.Ws. Are inter se related with each other and actually when I used to pick and drop Mst. Uzma along with other girls to college, Naseer Ahmad son of Muhammad Sarwar P.W. Used to tease Mst.
Uzma. I forbade Muhammad Naseer son of Muhammad Sarwar P.W. And later on he developed illicit relations with Mst. Uzma and she became pregnant due to the said illicit relations. This matter came into my notice. I insulted Muhammad Sarwar as well as Muhammad Naseer P.W. For the above said occurrence. On the fateful day some unknown persons murdered Shaukat Azhar deceased and they with the connivance of Muhammad Sarwar ,P.W. And with the connivance of police introduced me as accused in this case actually I was not present there nor I know anything about this occurrence."
7. The learned counsel for the appellant argued that the prosecution had failed to prove the - recovery of dagger, the weapon of offence, falsifying the whole prosecution story; that the police took the appellant to the house of the deceased for recovery of weapons of offence, a boy of 16/18 years of age opened the door whereas the other inmates of the house kept sleeping and the statement of that boy under section 161, Cr.P.C. Was also not recorded which made the recovery doubtful and unbelievable; that the recovery of blood-stained clothes of the appellant was also doubtful; that the report of the Serologist cannot be relied upon because the same was received after a long time; that the story narrated in the F.I.R. About going the whole family of the complainant save for his father and sister to the house of his Mamu at Dausa did not seem to be plausible as the prosecution has failed to prove that there was any such occasion for going there; that the evidence of extra-judicial confession had no independent value; that except Muhammad Arshad no other witness of extra-judicial confession had been produced by the prosecution in Court which had shattered the prosecution story; that the prosecution witnesses insisted Uzma Azhar to become a witness but she refused to give false evidence, at which she was introduced as co-accused in the case without any legal justification.
8. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State assisted by the learned counsel for the complainant argued that motive against the appellant had been proved; that the appellant was on visiting terms with the family of the deceased as he used to pick and drop Uzma through his rickshaw at college who developed illicit liaison with her and on the day of occurrence she called the appellant in her house and on reaching there the appellant tried to shift Uzma Azhar in a room for committing Zina with her but foot of Uzma Azhar accused struck to the door and the deceased, who was sleeping in the Verandah, woke up and on seeing his daughter Uzma Azhar in the hands of Muhammad Akram appellant a scuffle started. When Uzma saw that their secret was going to be exposed, she handed over a screw driver lying nearby to Muhammad Akram accused and asked him to finish Shaukat Azhar resulting the death of Shaukat Azhar. This motive part of prosecution case for the commission of murder of Shaukat Azhar has been proved by P.W.10, P.W.11 and P.W.9. Further submitted that it is a promptly lodged F.I.R. Which has ruled out the possibility of any concoction; that ocular account is consistent with the medical evidence; that the ocular evidence and recoveries of weapons of offence have proved the prosecution case beyond reasonable doubt. The prosecution has proved through investigation that Muhammad Akram accused committed the murder of the deceased with screw driver and dagger while Uzma Azhar facilitated the murder of her father when secret of their illicit relations was exposed before het father; that extra-judicial confession has been proved by Muhammad Arshad P.W.9 which is fully corroborated by other facts brought on the record; that the defence put forth by the appellant is not only a weak but also unbelievable which is not supported by any kind of defence evidence; that the contradictions in the prosecution evidence about the recoveries and some contradictions and exaggerations on the part of the police officials have no adverse effect on the prosecution case if otherwise by means of oral and medical evidence as well as other circumstantial evidence case against the appellant has been proved beyond any shadow of doubt.
9. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record with their assistance.
10. The occurrence took place on 19-6-1999 at 2-30 p.m. And the police reached the place of occurrence at about 2-45/3-00 p.m. Where the statement of the complainant was recorded. The F.I.R. Exh.P.J./1 was, therefore, lodged with promptitude, thus eliminating the possibility of fabrication and false involvement of the appellant.
11. The eye-witnesses of the occurrence namely Imran Azhar P.W.10 and Muhammad Sarwar P.W.11 are also the witnesses of motive. The statement of Muhammad Imran Azhar P.W.10 as to the motive was fully corroborated by Muhammad Sarwar P.W.11. The two witnesses categorically stated that the appellant was forbidden by the deceased from committing Zina with Mst. Uzma Azhar the acquitted accused. The very fact that Mst. Uzma was subsequently cited as an accused goes to show that the motive as asserted by the prosecution was the impelling cause resulting in the murder of the deceased.
12. The statement of Imran Azhar P.W.10 is indicative of the fact that the deceased was done to death by the appellant in his presence. This witness was subjected to a lengthy cross-examination but nothing beneficial to the accused could be extracted from him. The version given by this witness is not only credible and confidence-inspiring but the same is free from any dishonest exaggerations or improvements. Imran Azhar P.W.10 has established his presence at the place of occurrence at the relevant time which even otherwise was not seriously questioned by the appellant. Besides that, he has no enmity whatsoever with the appellant, hence, the question of false implication of the appellant in a concocted case, does not arise. The possibility of false involvement is further ruled out by the F.I.R. Which was promptly lodged. The statement of P.W.10 finds full support from the deposition of Muhammad Sarwar who has categorically stated that the dedeased was done to death by the appellant in his view by inflicting injuries with a screw driver and a dagger. The cumulative effect of the statements of these two witnesses is that it can be safely inferred that the deceased Shaukat Azhar was murdered by the appellant in their presence.
Mere relationship of P.W.10 and P.W.11 with the deceased is no ground to discard their testimony in - the absence of any animosity against the appellant. The appellant has failed to bring on the record any such attending circumstance to show that Imran Azhar P.W.10, the son of the deceased, was personally involved in any act of enmity. The Honourable Supreme Court, of Pakistan in the case of Iqbal alias Bala and 2 others v. The State 1994 SCM R 1 has held that mere relationship of a witness with the deceased would not be sufficient to discredit a witness particularly where there is no motive to falsely involve the accused.
13. Further, the evidence of the eye-witness stands corroborated by the medical evidence furnished by Dr. Javaid Iqbal P.W.4. The postmortem report reveals that the deceased had received 13 stab wounds and 16 punctured. Wounds. Thus, the medical evidence to the extent of time of occurrence, the locale of injuries sustained by the deceased and the weapon used in the commission of crime is consistent with the ocular account.
14. Insofar as the recovery of weapons is concerned, blood-stained screw driver 'was recovered from the spot whereas blood-stained dagger (P.2) was recovered at the pointation of the appellant from the house of the complainant wrapped in a shopper from the space between backside and seat of the Sofa lying in the drawing room of the house. The recovery of the dagger was witnessed by Tahir Mehmood constable P.W.6 and Sajjad Ali, S.-I. P.W.13. The recovery of dagger from the place and in the manner as stated by the said P.Ws. Appears to be highly improbable. The eye-witnesses in their testimony deposed that the occurrence had taken place in the Veranda of the house and the appellant F on seeing the witnesses while brandishing the dagger decamped through the door which implies that the appellant had exited through the outer door and not through the drawing room wherefrom the dagger P.2 was recovered and that top wrapped in a plastic bag. Further, the only witnesses of the recovery are Police Officers who did not associate anyone from the locality or even a person from the household of the complainant with the recovery proceedings. Thus, there is gross violation of the mandatory provisions of section 103, Cr.P.C. And acceptance of evidence of police officials may amount to making prosecution itself a Judge of its own cause. However, this aspect of the matter has not weakened the prosecution case against the appellant as even if this piece of evidence is excluded from consideration, there is other overwhelming independent evidence available on the record including an unimpeachable eye-witness account corroborated by the medical evidence, the motive for the occurrence, recovery of bloodstained screw driver, blood- stained earth and the positive report of the Chemical Examiner and the Serologist Exh.P.N. Exh.P.S., Exh.P.T. And Exh. P .0 U.
15. Insofar as the extra-judicial confession made by Mst. Uzma Azhar acquitted co-accused before Muhammad Arshad P.W.9 is concerned, suffice it to say that after her acquittal by the learned trial Court, the same has lost its relevance qua the appellant. The appellant at the trial neither adduced any evidence in his defence nor entered the witness-box to make statement under section 340(2), Cr.P.C.
16. For what has been discussed above, there is no doubt in our minds that the prosecution has succeeded in proving its case against the appellant beyond any reasonable doubt. Resultantly, we dismiss Criminal Appeal No,1120 of 2006 and maintain the conviction and sentence awarded to the appellant Muhammad Akram. The death sentence awarded to the appellant is confirmed Murder Reference No,707 of 2000 is answered in the affirmative.