1. ' BASHIR A. MUJAHID, J.--- Muhammad Mansha son of Muhammad Hussain has challenged judgment dated 22-1-2000 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Lahore, whereby he, after having been tried in case F.I.R. No, 342/99 under sections 302/109, P.P.C. Registered at P.S. Kahna, was convicted under section 302(b), P.P.C. And sentenced to death.
2. ' Through the same judgment Muhammad Hussain son of Jewan, father of the appellant was acquitted of the charge.
3. ' The brief facts of the prosecution case are that F.I.R. Exh.PA/l was registered on the complaint Exh.PA of Ashiq Ali, P.W.2 recorded by Sh. Muhammad Anwar A.S-I., P.W.12 stating therein that he along with his brother Akbar Ali (deceased) were coming towards village Kahna from village Kachha. Akbar Ali was cycling and the complainant was sitting at the back carrier. At 4-15 p.m.
4. When they reached Islampura Morr, all of a sudden Muhammad Mansha, appellant came in front of his cycle and raised Lalkara that he would teach a lesson to Akbar Ali for his insult and took Mauser .30 bore out and fired straight at Akbar Ali hitting on his right side of ear. On which Akbar Ali fell on the ground in critical position. The complainant raised hue, and cry which attracted Ashiq Ali.
5. Son of Muhammad Tufail and Muhammad Hafeez, P.W.1 who witnessed the occurrence. They tried to apprehend Muhammad Mansha appellant but he fled away while brandishing Mauser in the air.
6. The motive for the occurrence was that 3/4 months ago Akbar Ali and Mansha had a petty brawl which was resolved through `Panchayat but Mansha nourished grudge, on which, he caused firearm injury to the deceased. The injured was taken to General Hospital Lahore he was got admitted and the F.I.R. Exh.PA/1 was registered at 7-15 p.m. Originally under section 324, P.P.C. But on death of Akbar Ali on 16-9-1999 in the Hospotal section 302, P.P.C. Was added.
7. ' The brief facts of the prosecution case are that F.I.R. Exh.PA/1 was registered on the complaint Exh.PA of Ashiq Ali, P.W.2 recorded by Sh. Muhammad Anwar A.S-L, P.W.12 stating therein that he along with his brother Akbar Ali (deceased) were coming towards village Kahna from village Kachha. Akbar Ali was cycling and the complainant was sitting at the back carrier. At 4-15 p.m.
8. When they reached Islampura Morr, all of a sudden Muhammad Mansha, appellant came in front of his cycle and raised Lalkara that he would teach a lesson to Akbar Ali for his insult and took Mauser .30 bore out and fired straight at Akbar Ali hitting on his right side of ear. On which Akbar Ali fell on the ground in critical position. The. Complainant raised hue and cry which attracted Ashiq Ali son of Muhammad Tufail and Muhammad Hafeez, P.W. 1 who witnessed the occurrence. They tried to apprehend Muhammad Mansha appellant but he fled away while brandishing Mauser in the air.
9. The motive for the occurrence was that 3/4 months ago Akbar Ali aud Mansha had a petty brawl which was resolved through 'Panchayat' but Mansha nourished grudge, on which, he caused firearm injury to the deceased. The injured was taken to General Hospital Lahore he was got admitted and the F.I.R. Exh.PA/1 was registered at 7-15 p.m. Originally under section 324, P.P.C. But on death of Akbar Ali on 16-9-1999 in the Hospital section 302, P.P.C. Was added.
10. ' The investigation of the case was undertaken firstly by Muhammad Anwar A.S.-I., P.W. 12 after receiving the information of the occurrence arrived at Emergency Ward, General Hospital, Lahore and moved application Exh.PD to "the Medical Officer to know about the condition of the injured for recording of his statement but it was reported by the doctor that the patient was not yet fit to make statement. .On which, he recorded the Statement Exh.PA and sent the same to the police station for registration of formal F.I.R. He himself arrived at the place of occurrence and collected blood through cotton from the spot through memo. Exh.PB. He also took into possession bicycle of the deceased PI through memo. Exh.PE. He also recorded the statement of the P.Ws. Under section 161, Cr.P.C. Thereafter, theSnvestigation was entrusted to Mansab Dar S.-I. P.W. 11 who arrived at General Hospital,'Lahore and death of Akbar Ali on 16-9-1999 and took the dead body into possession, prepared the injury statement through memo. Exh.PK and inquest report Exh.PL and entrusted the dead body for post-mortem examination. Thereafter, he arrived at the place of occurrence and got prepared the site plan Exh.PF. After post-mortem examination he took last-worn clothes of the deceased into possession through memo Exh.PH. On 4-10-1999 he arrested Muhammad Mansha, appellant who on 8-10-1999 while in police custody led to the recovery of Mauser .30-bore P6 along with three live cartridges P7/1-3 which were taken into possession through memo. Exh.PK. He also arrested Muhammad Hussain, father of the appellant and after completion of investigation he submitted the challan in the Court.
11. ' The trial Court framed the charge which was denied by the accused and they claimed trial. During the trial the prosecution examined as many as 12 witnesses to prove the guilt of the accused.
12. ' The medical evidence was furnished by Dr. Nasim Safdar, P.W3 who on 15-9-1999 at 4-25 p.m.
13. Medically examined Akbar Ali and found the following injuries on his person:-
(1) A lacerated wound right ear 5 x 3 c.m, starting from temple to tragus DNP bleeding with blackened margins.
(2) Blackening 5x4 c.m. Temporal region.
14. (3)Tragus right ear which was totally lacerated (not identifiable).
15. ' On the death of Akbar Ali on 17-9-1999 Dr. Mazhar Mustafa, P.W. 6 conducted the post-mortem examination on his dead body.
16. ' The ocular account was. Furnished by Ashiq Ali, P.W. 2 who was complainant of the case. He sUppbrted the prosecution story as narrated in the F.I.R. And also stated motive for the occurrence.
17. Muhammad Hafeez, P.W. 1 was eyewitness of the occurrence. He alsQ supported the prosecution story as narrated by Ashiq Ali, P.W. 2 and implicated the appellant for having fired at the deceased from his Mauser. Amanat Ali P.W. 4 identified the dead body of Akbar Ali at the time of post-mortem examination. Khalid Mahmood FC, P.W. 7 delivered the sealed parcel of blood-stained cotton at the office of Chemical Examiner. Saif Ullah HC, P.W. 9 kept the sealed parcel of bloodstained cotton in safe custody in police Malkhana and handed over the same of Khalid FC. Muhammad Sharif FC, P.W. 10 escorted the dead body of Akbar Ali to mortuary for post-mortem examination. He also attested the recovery memo. Exh.PJ whereby Mauser P6 and three live bullets P7/1-33 were taken into possession.
18. ' The prosecution evidence was closed by tendering in evidence report of Chemical Examiner Exh.PO and that of Serologist Exh.PP. ' The statement of the appellant/ accused was recorded under section 342, Cr.P.C. He denied the allegations and claimed his innocence and false involvement. In reply to question as to why the case against him and the P.Ws. Deposed against, he stated as under: ' "Complainant being mine and my father's neighbour was nursing grudg over a dispute of passage for a long. P.Ws. Have deposed against me being relatives and partisan."
19. ' The trial culminated into conviction and sentence of the appellant as mentioned above. Hence this appeal.
20. ' Learned counsel for the appellant has argued that the deceased was got admitted in Hospital by one Abdul Ghafoor which shows that Ashiq Ali, P.W.2 was not present at the spot. Similarly, Muhammad Hafeez was a chance witness. The P.Ws. Have also implicated Muhammad Hussain, father of the appellant falsely through supplementary statement which creates serious doubt about the truthfulness of the P.Ws; that the ocular account has not been corroborated by any other independent source. That the recovery of Mauser is of ho consequence as no empty was taken into possession from the spot. It is also argued that Ashiq Ali son of Muhammad Tufail from whom Muhammad Hafeez. P.W. 1 has to get the money was given up and in his absence Ashiq Ali, P.W. 2 had no business to be present at the spot. In alternate, it has been prayed that it is not a case of capital punishment as motive alleged has not been proved and believed by the trial Court. It was a case of single fire and the appellant has not repeated the fire shot and the injured died after 30 hours. In support of his contentions, the learned counsel has placed reliance on 2000 SCM R 400, 2002 SCMR 1999, 2003 SCMR 1165, 2004 P.Cr.LJ 47 and 2004 P.Cr.U 320.
21. ' The appeal has been opposed by learned counsel for the complainant and for the State. Learned counsel for the complainant in support of his contentions placed reliance on 2002 SCMR 1086, 2002 SCM R 1806 and PLD 2004 SC 44.
22. ' We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and examined the record.
23. ' It was a daylight occurrence which took place at 4-15 p.m. And the deceased Akbar Ali was admitted in General Hospital, Lahore at 4-25 p.m. And statement Exh.PA was got recorded by the complainant in the hospital at 6-30 p.m. Where Muhammad Anwar A.S-I., P.W. 12 arrived on receipt of message from the hospital, which shows that the appellant was nominated in promptly recorded F.I.R. It is a case of single accused and there is no reason for his false implication by the complainant by letting off the real culprit. The complainant of the case has given the full detail of the occurrence in very natural manner. Similarly, Muhammad Hafeez, P.W.l who is an independent witness and has no relation whatsoever with the complainant or ill-will against the appellant to depose falsely, has supported the prosecution case. No material contradiction has been brought on record to discard their testimony. The ocular account furnished by Muhammad Hafeez, P.W.l and Ashiq Ali, P.W.2 hgs been fully corroborated by the medical evidence. It has been duly explained by Ashiq Ali, P.W.2 that Abdul Ghafoor who got the injured admitted in the hospital was his relative and it has also been admitted by the first Investigating Officer Muhammad Anwar, P.W.12 that many persons were available in the hospital when he arrived and recorded the complaint Exh.PA. The appellant was found guilty during the investigation and nobody on his behalf moved the higher police authorities for transfer of the investigation which shows impartial investigation. It is settled law that weakness or absence of the motive is no ground for awarding lesser penalty. Even people commit murder without any motive. After reappraisal of the evidence we find that the prosecution case has been established against the appellant beyond shadow of doubt and find no reason warranting interference in the conviction recorded against the appellant or the sentence awarded, therefore, the appeal stands dismissed having no force.
24. ' Murder Reference No,629 of 2000 is answered in affirmation.