' TARIQ SHAMIM, J.---The appellant, namely, Iftikhar Ahmad alias Phullu son of Inayat was tried by the learned Sessions judge, Hafizabad, in case bearing F.I.R. No,256 of 2000, dated 24-7-2000 registered with Police Station Vanike Tarar, Hafizabad, for offence under sections 452, 302 and 324, P.P.C. The learned trial judge by virtue of his judgment, dated 12-11-2002 found him guilty of committing the murder of Zahoor Ahmad deceased, convicted under section 302(b), P.P.C. And sentenced him to death with a further direction to pay a sum of Rs,1,00,000 to the legal heirs of the deceased by way of compensation under section 544-A, Cr.P.C. And in default thereof to undergo simple imprisonment for six months. He was also convicted under section 324, P.P.C. For launching murderous assault upon Mst. Zohra Bibi and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for seven years along with a fine of Rs,20,000 which was to be paid to Mst. Zohra Bibi and in default thereof to undergo simple imprisonment for two moths. Benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C. Was extended to the appellant.
2. The appellant by filing this appeal through jail has called in question the conviction and sentenced awarded to him vide the impugned judgment, whereas the learned trial judge has sent Murder Reference No,847 of 2002 for confirmation of said death sentence.
3. Precisely the allegations against the appellant, according to the F.I.R., which was got registered on 24-7-2000 at 8-20 a.m. By Noor Muhammad complainant (P.W.8), are that son of the complainant namely Zahoor Ahmad (deceased) was married with Mst. Zohra Bibi four months before; that in the preceding night at about 3-00 a.m. The said Zahoor Ahmad and Mst. Zohra Bibi were sleeping a separate room when, suddenly, after hearing of the fire shots the complainant came in the courtyard and saw Iftikhar Ahmad armed with a .30 bore pistol emerging from the room, where Zahoor Ahmad and Mst. Zohra Bibi were sleeping, who was saying that he had taught a lesson to Zohra Bibi for getting divorce from him and to Zahoor Ahmad for marrying her; that on the hue and cry raised by the complainant Walayat and Saifullah were attracted to the spot; that Iftikhar Ahmad on seeing them fled away; that when they entered the room they saw Zahoor Ahmad lying dead on receiving fire-arm injuries on his abdomen and left buttock and Mst. Zohra Bibi lying in an injured condition on a cot.
4. At the trial the prosecution examined as many as 13 witnesses. Noor Muhammad complainant appeared as P.W.8 and averred on the same lines as the F.I.R. Mst. Zohra Bibi, the wife of the deceased, being an eye-witness stated that on hearing fire-shots she woke up and saw the appellant standing in the room with the pistol who after having injured the deceased fired shot at her which landed on her abdomen. Saifullah appeared as P.W.1 and deposed on the same lines as Noor Muhammad and Mst. Zohra Bibi (P.Ws.8 and 9 respectively). Dr. Rukhsana Kausar (P.W.1) medically examined Mst. Zohra Tabassum, wife of the deceased and observed two injuries on her person, one entry wound and other exit wound. Her MLR is Exh.P.A. And the diagram of injuries is Exh.P.A./1. Dr. Nusrat Abbas (P.W.2) conducted autopsy on the dead body of the deceased on 24-7- 2000 and observed injuries on the body of the deceased as stated by the eye-witnesses. He proved Exh.P.B. As the correct carbon copy of the post-mortem report while Exh.P.B./1 as diagrams of the injuries. Ehsanullah Constable appeared as P.W.3 who received non-bailable warrants Exh.P.G. Of Iftikhar Ahmad appellant for his arrest and returned the same with his report Exh.P.G./l.
He received proclamation Exh.P.H. Of the appellant and returned with his report Exh . P. H. /1. Ashiq Hussain, A.S.-I. ,appeared as P.W.4 who received complaint Exh.P.J. Sent by the S.H.O. And recorded the F.I.R. Exh. P.F. Riaz Hussain Constable appeared as P.W.5. Muhammad Yaqoob A.S.-I. Appeared as P.W.6. Muhammad Iqbal Constable appeared as P.W.7. Masood Ahmad Bhatti, draftsman, appeared as P.W.11 who prepared scaled site plans Exh.P.N. And Exh.P.N./1. Shaukat Ali, S.-I., appeared as P.W.12 who arrested the appellant and got his judicial remand. On 10-6-2001 during physical remand the appellant led the police party to his house from where he got recovered .30 bore pistol P.5 from a room which was taken into possession by the police. He handed over the case property to the Moharrar/HC after sealing the same into a parcel. He prepared the supplementary challan. Muhammad Irshad Inspector/S.H.O. Appeared as P.W.13 before whom Noor Muhammad, complainant made his statement Exh.P.J. He inspected the dead body of the deceased and prepared injury statement Exh.P.D. As well as the inquest report Exh.P.E. He also inspected the place of occurrence and took into possession blood-stained earth through recovery memo. Exh.P.L. He collected two empties of .30 bore pistol P-4/1-2, made them into sealed parcels and took the same into possession vide recovery memo. Exh.P.M. He recorded the statements of P.Ws. Under section 161, Cr.P.C. And prepared rough site plan Exh.P.O. Muhammad Iqbal (P.W.7) handed over to him the last-worn clothes of the deceased which were taken into possession by him vide recovery memo. Exh.P.K. He prepared incomplete challan and sent the same in the Court.
Reports of the Chemical Examiner Exh. P.Q . , of Serologist Exh.P.R. And of Forensic Science Laboratory Exh.P.S. And Exh.P.T. Were tendered in evidence.
5. On the conclusion of the prosecution evidence, statement of the accused under section 342, Cr.P.C. Was recorded by the learned trial Court. In answer to the question as to why the case against him and why the P.Ws. Had deposed against him, Iftikhar Ahmad appellant replied that he had been falsely involved in the case due to enmity by the P. Ws.
6. The learned counsel for the appellant has argued that the occurrence was not witnesses by anyone as in fact the eye-witnessed had reached the place of occurrence after the deceased had been shot; that the evidence furnished by Noor Muhammad (P.W.8), Mst. Zohra Bibi (P.W.9) and Saifullah (P.W.10) can only be considered as last seen evidence as they had not seen the appellant inflicting injuries on the person of the deceased; that there were material contradictions in the statements made by the said P.Ws. Before the learned trial Court which are fatal to the prosecution case; that Mst. Zohra Bibi (P.W.9), the widow of the deceased, had made improvements in her statement relating to fire-arm injury received by her; that in fact it was a dark night and murder of the deceased was committed by one Ehsanullah of the same village who was unhappy with the marriage of Mst. Zohra with the deceased and that the appellant has been implicated in this case by the complainant on account of suspicion only.
7. Conversely, Syed Faisal Raza Bokhari, the learned Deputy Prosecutor-General has argued that the appellant while taking the plea of being falsely involved on account of enmity has not provided any details of the same; that the occurrence was seen by the witnesses in the light of electric bulb; that the contradictions pointed out by the learned counsel for the appellant were minor in nature; that all the P.Ws. In their statements have supported each other on material points; that said Ehsanullah had no motive to commit the murder of the deceased; that the eye-witnesses account is credible and is corroborated by the medical evidence, the evidence of recovery and that of absconsion of the appellant for more than 10 months.
8. We have heard the learned counsel and have gone through the record.
9. It has been noticed that Noor Muhammad (P.W.8) and Saifullah (P.W.10) had no enmity with the appellant on account of which it could be asserted that the appellant had been falsely implicated in the case. Saifullah (P.W.10) is neither related to the deceased nor inimical towards the appellant.
Insofar as Mst. Zohra Bibi (P.W.9) is concerned, suffice it to say that there is nothing on the record to even remotely suggest that she had any enmity, grudge or against the appellant. There is no denying the fact that Mst. Zohra Bibi is the star witness who had not only witnessed the occurrence take place but had also received a fire-arm injury in her abdomen which fact is fully corroborated by the medical evidence. The presence of Mst. Zohra Bibi at the time and place of occurrence being the wife of the deceased is natural and fully established on the record. This aspect has not even been challenged by the defence at the trial. The account furnished by this witness is credible and does not suffer from an infirmity or material contradiction. Despite being subjected to lengthy cross-examination nothing favourable could be extracted by the defence from her testimony. The learned counsel for the appellant argued that at best the evidence furnished by Mst. Zohra Bibi at the trial Court be termed as last seen evidence as she had not actually seen the deceased being shot by the appellant. We are afraid the argument is devoid of any force as she in her statement has categorically stated that her husband/the deceased had received two fire-shots, one on his abdomen and the other on his left buttock and that after having shot the deceased, the appellant had fired at her causing injury on her abdomen. Noor Muhammad (P.W.8) and Saifullah (P.W.10) who had no motive to falsely involve the appellant in the case were attracted to the place of occurrence after hearing the shots and saw the appellant in the light of an electric bulb holding a pistol in his hand and saying that he had taught a lesson to Mst. Zohra Bibi for getting married with the deceased. The evidence furnished by Noor Muhammad (P.W.8), Mst. Zohra Bibi (P.W.9) and Saifullah (P.W.10) is in line with each other on all material aspects. The contradictions pointed out by the learned counsel for the appellant in the testimony of the said witnesses are trivial in nature and do not in any manner effect the veracity of the evidence furnished by the said witnesses.
10. Adverting to the plea taken by the appellant at the trial that in fact the murder of the deceased was committed by one Ehsanullah, suffice it to say that the appellant has not been able to substantiate his plea through any evidence documentary or otherwise. Although it was suggested that one Zafar Chattha had witnessed the occurrence being committed by some other persons but he was not produced by the prosecution at the trial. In such an eventuality the appellant should have produced the said witness in his defence which was not done. This obviously leads to presumption that the stand taken by the appellant to the said extent is false. Further, substitution is a rare phenomenon and in the facts and circumstances of the case the question of substitution does not arise. From the aforesaid it is manifest that the prosecution has been successful in proving the ocular account of the occurrence beyond all doubts against the appellant.
11. The medial evidence in the case was furnished by Dr. Rukhsana Kausar (P.W.1) who had examined Mst. Zohra Tabassum, wife of the deceased, on the day of occurrence. The post-mortem of the deceased was conducted by Dr. Nusrat Abbas (P.W.2). The evidence furnished by the said witnesses is in line with the ocular account and is conclusive as to the time, locale of injury and the weapon used. Even otherwise, the medical evidence had not been challenged by the defence, therefore, we have no hesitation in holding that the ocular account is furnished by the P.Ws. Is fully corroborated by the medical evidence.
12. From the place of occurrence blood stained earth was secured by Muhammad Irshad Inspector/S.H.O. (P.W.13) and made into a sealed parcel taken into possession vide recovery memo.
Exh.P.L. Two crime empties of .30 bore pistol P.4/1-2 were also taken into possession vide recovery memo. Exh.P.M. The appellant who had absconded after the occurrence on being arrested on 7-6- 2001 while in police custody led to the recovery of a .30 bore pistol P.5 from a room of his house. The witnesses of recovery of pistol are Wilayat and Saifullah (P. W.10). The said witnesses, as has been stated earlier, are neither related to the deceased nor inimical towards the appellant. The testimony furnished by these two witnesses to the extent of recovery of pistol, crime empties and blood-stained earth is credible in all aspects and there is absolutely no reason for us to disbelieve their evidence. The empties P.4/1-2 were sent for Expert opinion to the Forensic Science Laboratory and after the pistol had been recovered from the appellant, the same was also dispatched to the laboratory for opinion. The reports of the Forensic Science B Laboratory Exh. P. S. And Exh.P. T. Reflect that the empties had matched with pistol P.S. Since the empties have been wedded with the weapon recovered from the appellant, therefore, evidence of recovery has lent further support to the prosecution case. Insofar as the blood-stained earth is concerned, since the place of occurrence is not disputed, there is no need to discuss the same.
13. The occurrence in the instant case took place on 24-7-2000 while the appellant was arrested on 7-6-2001 thus, he remained an absconder for more than 10 months. Although conviction cannot be based on mere absconsion of the accused nevertheless, it is a factor which is significant and has to be taken into consideration by the Court along with other material. The factum of absconsion of the appellant is fully proved from the document available on record and testimony furnished by Ehsanullah (P.W.3) and Muhammad Irshad, Inspector (P.W.13).
' In view of what has been discussed above, we have no hesitation in holding that the prosecution has been successful in proving its case against the appellant beyond any reasonable doubt.
Consequently, the appeal is dismissed and the sentence of death awarded to the appellant by the learned trial Court is confirmed.
' The murder reference is answered in the affirmative.