' NASIM SABIR, J.---Muhammad Imran son of Rehmat Ali and Muhammad Azam son of Ghulam Rasool were tried by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Pasrur, District Sialkot, for committing murder of Aqsad alias Arshad, son of Bashir Ahmed-complainant. The learned trial Judge by virtue of his judgment dated 19-9-2002 found Muhammad Imran and Muhammad Azam-appellants guilty of the said charge, convicted them under sections 302(c)/34, P.P.0 and sentenced them to imprisonment for life each. Muhammad Imran was also directed to pay a sum of Rs,1,00,000 to legal heirs of the deceased by way of compensation as envisaged by the relevant provisions of section 544-A, Cr.P.C. He was directed to confine in jail till the payment of said compensation.
Benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C. Was, however, accorded to both the appellants.
2. By filing the instant appeal Muhammad Imran and Muhammad Azamconvicts have approached this Court to call in question convictions and sentences passed against them.
3. Bashir Ahmed the first informant reported the incident through a statement (Exh.P.A.) to Muhammad Arif S.-I. At Hospital Pasrur on 10-7-2001 alleging therein that in their village a wrestling match was being played on the eve of fair of Noor Shah Wali. At about 5-00 p.m. He and his son Aqsad alias Arshad went to see the match. Muhammad Hussain, Muhammad Akram and other people were also present there. In the meantime, Imran armed with pistol, Muhammad Azam armed with pistol arrived there. Muhammad Azam started firing and raised a Lalkara that he would teach Arshad a lesson for misbehaving with them. On this Imran fired a shot through his pistol, which hit Aqsad alias Arshad at his chest which produced through and through injury. Khalid Mehmood tried to rescue them but Imran fired second shot at Khalid Mehmood, which hit him at his right leg. The accused ran away from the spot. The injured were shifted to the hospital where Aqsad alias Arshad succumbed to his injuries. An altercation between the accused and the deceased prior to the occurrence had been set up as motive in the F.I.R.
4. After registration of case, Muhammad Arif S.-I. (P.W.12) went to the Civil Hospital Pasrur and prepared injury statement (Exh.P.3.), inquest report (Exh.P.K.) and dispatched the dead body to the mortuary for post-mortem examination. Thereafter, he left for the spot and on reaching there inspected the same and prepared rough site-plan (Exh.P.L.). He took into possession blood-stained earth vide memo. (Exh.P.H.). The complainant handed over accused Imran to the Investigating Officer, who deferred his arrest because he was seriously injured. He got him admitted in Civil Hospital Pasrur. He arrested Imran accused on 10-7-2001 and on 12-7-2001 Imran accused led to the recovery of .30 bore pistol from a sugar cane field, which was taken into possession by him through memo. (Exh.P.M.). On 11-7-2001 Investigating Officer submitted an application to the doctor whether Khalid Mehmood injured was fit to make a statement or not. The doctor opined that he was fit to make a statement. Accordingly, the Investigating Officer recorded his statement on 13-7- 2001 under section 161, Cr.P.C. He examined all the relevant witnesses under section 161, Cr.P.C. He submitted the challan against Imran accused whereas Azam accused was placed in Column No,2 of the challan sheet.
5. The learned trial Court on receipt of challan after observing necessary formalities framed charge against the accused to which he pleaded not guilty.. Accordingly, the prosecution was directed to lead evidence against the accused.
6. The prosecution produced as many as sixteen witnesses in support of the prosecution case.
' Dr. Gull Nawaz Bajwa (P.W.8) conducted autopsy on the dead body of Aqsad alias Arshad and found seven injuries on his person. In his opinion death occurred due to haemorrhage and shock resulting from Injury No,1, which was declared sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature.
' Dr. Rashid Hussain Sherazi (P. W . 13) medically examined Khalid Mehmood on 10-7-2001 and found one injury on his person. It was caused by fire-arm. (Exh.P.O.) is the Medico-legal report.
' Bashir Ahmed-complainant (P.W.1), Khalid Mehmood (P.W.2) and Muhammad. Akram (P.W.3) are witnesses of the occurrence. They fully supported the prosecution version.
' Muhammad Nawaz (P.W.15) and Riasat Ali (P.W.16) also supported the prosecution version they attested the recoveries. The remaining witnesses are of formal nature, so their statements need not to be discussed in detail.
7. Learned Prosecutor after tendering in evidence reports of Chemical Examiner, Serologist and Forensic Science Laboratory (Exh . P.P. , P. Q. And P.R. ) respectively declared the prosecution case closed.
8. Thereafter, the statement of the accused under section 342, Cr.P.C. Were recorded. The accused made total denial of the occurrence and alleged their false involvement in the case. They opted not to make statement on oath nor did they produce any evidence in disproof of accusations brought against them.
9. The learned trial Court after hearing both the sides passed verdict of guilty against the appellants as aforementioned.
10. Learned counsel for the appellant has forcefully argued that Bashir Ahmed-complainant (P.W.1), who is father of Aqsad alias Arshad deceased as well as Khalid Mehmood (P.W.2), who was injured in the alleged occurrence and another eyewitness, namely, Muhammad Akram (P.W.3), who was present at the spot, had not supported the prosecution story, therefore, any corroboration from any source is of no value. Adds that best evidence had not supported the prosecution version, therefore, involvement of the appellants has not been proved beyond any shadow of doubt; that there was no motive to Kill Aqsad alias Arshad deceased and that Muhammad Nawaz (P.W.15) and Riasat Ali (P.W.16) alleged recovery witnesses have also not supported the factum of recovery.
Lastly, he submits that appellants are innocent; that prosecution has failed to prove the case against them beyond any shadow of doubt and in fact this is a case of no evidence.
11. On the contrary, learned counsel for the State vehemently argued that appellants were named in the first information report and specific role was attributed to Muhammad Imran that he had fired hitting chest of Aqsad alias Arshad, whereas second fire hit Khalid Mehmood (P.W.2) on his right leg. Adds that there is an independent witness Muhammad Hussain (P.W.7), who has supported the prosecution story and his testimony was sufficient to convict the appellants.
12. I have heard the learned counsel for both the sides and have perused the record carefully with the help of learned counsel. According to statement of Bashir Ahmed-complainant (P. W. 1). About 10/11 months prior there was a fair in the village Sainnwali at the shrine of Baba Noor Shah Wali, At 5-00 p.m. There was a Kabaddi Match, so many persons were gathered there. During the said Kabaddi Match, a fight took place in which some persons started firing in the air. A fire hit his son.
There was a general firing and he was not sure whose fire hit his son. Similar is the statement of Khalid Mehmood injured (P.W.2), who categorically stated that a fight took place and there was a general firing in the air by the mob gathered there. A fire hit him on his right leg. He was also not confident whose fire hit him, similar is the statement of 3rd eye-witness. The statements of these three very important as well as disinterested witnesses are very natural, the prosecution's star witnesses had not supported the allegation against the appellants, therefore, false involvement of the appellants cannot be ruled out in this case.
13. So far as the testimony of Muhammad Hussain (P.W.7) is concerned. He specifically named the appellants responsible for the occurrence. He has admitted in his statement that there was a Kabaddi Match on the eve of Urs of shrine of Baba Noor Shah Wali and numbers of people were gathered there to see the match. In my view, in such-like cases, it is very difficult to pin point that who fired at whom, there was a general firing by the mob, as a consequence of which one person has lost his life and other was injured. Even the injured does not know by whose fire he was injured.
Testimonies of P.Ws.1 to 3 inspire confidence as they have given natural account of the incident whereas testimony of Muhammad Hussain (P.W.7) cannot be believed under the circumstances of this case. However, in order to connect Muhammad Imran-appellant with the incident, the recovery of pistol has allegedly been made from him. It may be pointed out here that Muhammad Nawaz (P.W.15) and Riasat Ali (P.W.16), who were witnesses of the alleged recovery, had stated that they had signed blank-papers on the asking of Investigating Officer. It is interesting to note that numbers of people were present to watch Kabaddi Match and admittedly the field (playground) belongs to one Parveen Bibi, who was in cultivating possession of the same. The field in question was under cultivation and not a plane/smooth surfaced piece of land. Presence of number of persons is also admitted. In this situation, the statement of Muhammad Hussain (P.W.7) saying that he collected two empties from the spot, is unbelievable and is a concocted story, in order to involve the appellants in this incident for ulterior motive not disclosed in the testimony. Record also reveals that there was no motive on the part of the appellants for commission of such heinous offence.
There is no previous enmity between the two groups. Incident has taken place admittedly during a Kabaddi Match between the supporters of opposing teams. C Some unknown persons resorted to firing, which resulted in injuries to the deceased and injured P.W. Three main eye-witnesses have clearly exonerated the appellants of the offence. In the peculiar circumstances of the case, testimony of Muhammad Hussain (P.W.7) does not inspire confidence.
14. In view of what has been discussed above, I am of the confirmed opinion that prosecution has utterly failed to bring home the guilt of the appellants. Prosecution had failed to bring on record sufficient material in order to burden the appellants with responsibility of causing the death of a person and injuring another.
15. For all these reasons. By accepting this appeal, I set aside convictions and sentences of the appellants and acquit them of the charge by giving them benefit of doubt. Muhammad Imran- appellant is ordered to be released from custody forthwith, if not required to be detained in any other case. Muhammad Azam-appellant is already on bail. He is discharged of his surety bonds.