' Respondents Muhammad Nawaz and Mst. Kausar Parveen were tried by Additional Sessions Judge, Sargodha for the murder of Allah Bukhsh in case F.I.R. No. 182 of 2001, dated 18-12-2001 under section 302/34, P.P.C. Registered at Police Station Jhawarian, who vide judgment, dated 26-2-2003 while extending benefit of doubt acquitted both of them from the charge.
' Mst. Manzooran complainant of the said case being not satisfied by the impugned judgment, filed this appeal challenging the acquittal of respondents.
2. In brief the case of the prosecution is that Mst. Manzooran daughter of Allah Bukhsh deceased, on 15-12-2001 at about 6 a.m. Received a message through announcement in the mosque of village Hayat Pur (where she was residing) that her father Allah Bakhsh had committed suicide. On receipt of this information she along with Mst. Rajan P.W.7, her grandmother Mst. Sakina and Ahmad Yar P.W.8 went to the Dera of her father which was at a distance of one mile from the said village and saw the dead body of Allah Bakhsh her father lying on the cot. Statedly she doubted about the suicide of her father. In the meantime Dost Muhammad and Sultan Ahmad also came there. They took them aside and told that on the night between 14/15-12-2001 while they were coming to their Dera after attending Travih prayer, when they reached near the Dera of Allah Bukhsh, they heard hue and cry. Both of them entered into the Dera where they saw that Muhammad Nawaz and Kausar Parveen had tied a rope around the neck of Allah Bukhsh and were strangulating him who died at the spot. On seeing the witnesses both the accused fled away. On this information complainant asked Muhammad Nawaz and Kausar Parveen to hand over the dead body of Allah Bukhsh but they hurriedly gave bath to the deceased and buried him. Statedly there was no male member available at that time, husband of complainant Manzooran had gone to Lahore, therefore, on his arrival on 18-12-2001 case F.I.R. No. 182 of 2001 for the offence under section 302/34, P.P.C. At Police Station Jhawarian was got registered.
' Motive for the murder was stated to be that the father of the complainant namely Allah Bukhsh was 60/70 years of age, whereas Kausar Parveen (respondent), second wife of the deceased was 20/22 years of age. Muhammad Nawaz (respondent) who was a paternal cousin and brother- in- law of the deceased (Allah Bukhsh) had developed illicit relations with Kausar Parveen and on coming to know about the said relations, Allah Bukhsh stopped Muhammad Nawaz from visiting his house. Statedly Muhammad Nawaz did not like the interference of deceased and he with the connivance of Mst. Kausar Parveen had committed the murder of Allah Bukhsh deceased.
3. Before the trial Court, prosecution produced thirteen witnesses to prove the charge against respondents. Dr. Humera Batool P.W.1. Examined Mst. Kausar Parveen (respondent) and found her to be healthy middle aged woman. Dr. Nisar ul Hassan P.W.2. Conducted the post-mortem examination on the dead body of Allah Bukhsh deceased after disinterment at dead-body. Report of doctor reveals that the cause of death was asphyxia. Shah Muhammad FC P.W.3. Kept the parcel (case property) in Mal Khana for safe custody and handed over the same to the constable for its onward transmission to the relevant office. Abdul Qadir FC P.W.4. Took the parcel to the office of Chemical Examiner. Mehboob Hussain Patwari P.W.S. Prepared the sealed site-plan. Mst..
Manzooran P.W.6, Mst. Rajan P.W.7. And Ahmad Yar P.W.8 while supporting the prosecution case deposed before the trial Court Dost Muhammad P.W.9 being the eye-witness of this occurrence stated that Allah Bukhsh deceased was strangulated to death by both the respondents within his view. Muhammad Zaman P.W.10. Pointed out the grave of Allah Bukhsh before the Magistrate and the dead body was exhumed. Mr. Muhammad Zulfiqar Lone Judicial Magistrate P.W.
11. Conducted the proceedings of exhumation Manzoor Hussain S.-I. P.W.12 conducted the formal investigation of this case. Muhammad Bashir Constable P.W.13. Took the dead body of the deceased to the mortuary for post-mortem examination.
' Learned trial Court also examined respondents under section 342, Cr.P.C., while answering to the question "Why this case against you and why the P.Ws. Have deposed against you?", Mst. Kausar Parveen deposed as under:-- "I was the second wife of Allah Bukhsh deceased. Mst. Manzooran and Mst. Rajan P.Ws. And their mother were got turned out from the house of Allah Bukhsh deceased and Mst. Khatoon the mother of Mst. Manzooran and Mst. Rajan was divorced by Allah Bakhsh deceased. The P.Ws. Have cooked up the present story to grab the belongings and land under cultivation of the deceased, and the P.Ws. Who are related inter se have borne a grudge with me for this reason and have falsely indicted me in this case. I made an application before the Worthy Sessions Judge, Sargodha for the redress of my grievance as the P.Ws. Had forcibly taken the possession of the above said land of Allah Bakhsh deceased and other belongings. The Worthy Sessions Judge, summoned the parties and concerned Tehsildar and the S.H.O. Of Police Station Jhawarian. However, later on the learned Sessions Judge directed the parties to move the competent Court".
4. Heard. File perused.
' This occurrence took place on the night falling in between 14/15-12-2001. Statedly at the relevant time Dost Muhammad P.W.9 along with Sultan Ahmad (given up) were coming back after saying their Travi prayer, they heard hue and cry from Dera of Allah Bukhsh and both of them entered the Dera and saw both respondents strangulating Allah Bukhsh deceased with rope. It is not understandable as to why these witnesses did not make any effort to get hold of the assailants.
One of them was woman and they were not carrying any lethal weapon. It is also strange that none of them reported the matter to the police and remained silent for almost three days when on 18-12- 2001 matter was reported to the police by Mst. Manzooran P.W.6. The silence of these eye- witnesses, for such a long time doubts the credibility of prosecution A case. The explanation given by Mst. Manzooran about the delay in lodging the F.I.R. Was that there was no male member to accompany which seems to be concocted and tutored one. Both the said eyewitnesses along with Ahmed Yar P.W.8 a close relative of the deceased and complainant, were very much available.
There is no explanation on the record as to why they did not accompany the complainant to inform the police about this occurrence. Similarly there is no direct evidence about the motive part of the prosecution case. It is very much established B from the record that Mst. Manzooran daughter of Allah Bukhsh (complainant) had no brother out of the wedlock of her mother and deceased Allah Bakhsh, whereas Kausar Parveen had two sons out of the wedlock with Allah Bukhsh deceased.
Mother of the complainant was divorced by Allah Bukhsh deceased prior to his marriage .With Kausar Parveen (respondent) and he had already turned out the mother of the complainant namely Mst. Manzooran along with children from his house. The animosity and business of complainant party towards Mst. Kausar Parveen also stands established from the record.
' In the light of afore said circumstances of the case, learned trial Court has rightly extended the benefit of doubt in favour of respondents while acquitting them from the charge. The reasons given by the trial Court while passing the impugned judgment are neither arbitrary nor artificial and in the circumstances of this case, the impugned judgment needs no interference by this Court in its appellate jurisdiction. Finding no force in this appeal the 'same stands dismissed.