' MUHAMMAD MOOSA K. LEGHARI, J.--- These appeals are directed against the judgment, dated 11- 10-2001 passed by Lahore High Court, Multan Bench, Multan.
2. Consequent upon the registration of the F.I.R. 149 of 1995 at Police Station Gago on 11-5-1995 on the complaint of P.W.8 Muhammad Siddiq, the appellants along with co-accused were tried on the accusation of causing murder of Abdul Majeed, Sabir Ali and Zulfiqar Ali besides causing injuries to Muhammad Ibrahim, Liaqat Ali, Wajid Ali and Mst. Bilqees by Judge, Anti-Terrorism Court, No,II, Multan. On conclusion of trial all the appellants except Khalid Rashid were awarded death penalty whereas Khalid Rashid was awarded imprisonment for life. The appeals filed by the appellants before the High Court were dismissed except that the sentence of Nazir Ahmed was altered from death to imprisonment for life.
3. Leave to appeal was granted vide order, dated 6-6-2003 in the following manner:- "This order shall dispose of Cr.P.295 of 2001 and Jail Petition 202 of 2001 assailing the legality of judgment, dated 11-10-2001 whereby, a learned Division Bench of the Lahore High Court confirmed the death sentences of Ghulam Hussain son of Abdul Karim and Muhammad Ramzan and altered the conviction of Nazir Ahmed son of Noor Muhammad and Khalid Rashid petitioners to that of life imprisonment each, for the murders of Abdul Majeed, Zulfiqar and Sabir Ali deceased and for causing injuries to Liaqat Ali, Wajid Ali, Ibrahim and Mst. Bilquis.
After hearing both the learned counsel for the parties and having gone through the judgments of the Courts below, we have noticed that there is a contradiction between the statements of the eye-witness Bilquis P.W.9 and complainant Siddique P.W.8 qua the role of Ghulam Hussain, inasmuch as, she had categorically deposed that Ghulam Hussain had fired a rifle shot which hit Zulfiqar on his chest causing his death while the first informant Siddique attributes the death of Zulfiqar to Nazir Ahmed son of Noor Muhammad and Mehmood. It was further contended that occurrence took place during the dead hours of the night, therefore, it was not possible for the witnesses to have correctly identified the assailants in absence of electricity in the village. It was next contended that the Courts below have unjustifiably brushed aside the plea of alibi raised on behalf of petitioner Ghulam Hussain with regard to his detention at Police Station "B" Division Okara on 9-5-1995. Therefore, to consider only the quantum of sentence in this case, we grant leave to appeal. .
We have heard Mr. Ahmed Raza Khan Kasuri, Advocate Supreme Court, and are of view that since leave to appeal has already been granted in Cr.P.295 of 2001, therefore, we would grant leave to appeal in this jail petition as well to determine, as to whether such injury attributed to Khalid Rashid could have been caused by weapon used by him during the occurrence.
Leave to appeal granted in both these cases."
4. We have heard Syed Zafar Abbas Naqvi, learned Advocate Supreme Court for appellants Ghulam Hussain, Muhammad Ramzan and Nazir Ahmed, and Sahibzada Ahmed Raza Kasuri, learned Senior Advocate Supreme Court for appellant Khalid Rashid, Mian Mumtaz Asif, learned Deputy Prosecutor-General, appeared for State while Mr. Muhammad Zaman Bhatti, learned Advocate Supreme Court argued the case on behalf of the complainant. With the able assistance of learned counsel, we have examined the impugned judgment and scanned the evidence adduced on the record.
5. It must be stated at the outset that leave to appeal in the case of Ghulam Hussain, Muhammad Ramzan and Nazir Ahmed was granted only to consider the quantum of sentence. It has been brought in the evidence that the appellant Ghulam Hussain fired with his rifle, which hit Zulfiqar deceased on his chest which caused his death, while Muhammad Ramzan alias Jani appellant fired with his rifle, which hit Sabir Ali on his head and as a result he died. Appellant Nazir Ahmed has been attributed injury caused with his 12 bore gun to deceased Zulfiqar, who was awarded life imprisonment. Injuries so caused by the appellants to the deceased were declared to be fatal. All the three eye-witnesses i.e, P.W.8 Muhammad Siddiq, who is the first informer, besides P.W.9 Bilquis Bibi and P.W.10 Muhammad Ibrahim, who sustained injuries in the incident, have consistently and unambiguously deposed the above facts during trial. The ocular evidence is further supported by unrebutted medical evidence.
6. The plea of alibi raised on behalf of the appellants was given due and proper consideration by the Courts below and was rightly disbelieved. Indeed normal penalty for committing murder is death. We have heard learned counsel for the appellants at a considerable length, but he was unable to point out any mitigating circumstance to convince us for awarding lesser penalty. In fact the assailants committed the murder of three persons in a gruesome manner thus, having left no room for extenuation. Appellant Nazir Ahmed has already been awarded imprisonment for life. In these circumstances, the judgment passed by the learned Lahore High Court being unexceptionable requires no interference. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. Consequently, the penalty of death inflicted upon appellants Ghulam Hussain and Muhammad Ramzan, and sentence of life imprisonment awarded to appellant Nazir Ahmed is upheld.
7. So far as appeal filed by the appellant Khalid Rashid is concerned, he has been attributed one fire-arm injury on the right wrist of deceased Abdul Majeed. The fatal injury to deceased Abdul Majeed on his chest was caused by Ghulam Rasool with his kalashnikov. Learned Lahore High Court while discussing the role of appellant Khalid Rashid recorded the under mentioned findings:- "Khalid Rashid appellant was less than 16/17 years of age at the time of occurrence. He caused single fire-arm injury on wrist of Abdul Majeed deceased and has not repeated the shot. He is not attributed fatal blow to the deceased."
Yet without taking into consideration his complicity in the commission of crime and without assigning any reason, he was awarded life imprisonment, rending the said sentence unsubstantiated and uncalled for.
8. In this case, Abdul Rashid was implicated along with his two sons Khalid Rashid and Zahid Rashid. Accused Abdul Rashid was acquitted by the trial Court whereas accused Zahid Rashid was acquitted by the High Court while observing that he was not "directly connected with the motive part of the prosecution story". The appellant Khalid Rashid was aged 17 years at the time of incident. The presence of his father, Abdul Rashid, could not be established in the incident. In the given circumstances, the possibility of false implication of the appellant Khalid Rashid could not be ruled out. We feel that for safe administration of justice, he is entitled to benefit of doubt.
Accordingly, while extending him benefit of doubt, we allow his appeal and set aside the conviction and sentence. Accordingly he shall be released forthwith if not required in any other case.