FAKHRUDDIN G. EBRAHIM, J.-The appellant, Ghulam Nazir son of Shadman Khoso, aged about 25 years and a resident of village Sakrio Khoso, Taluka Ghachro. Stood his trial in the Court of Sessions Judge, Tharparkar at Mirpurkhas under sections 302 and 323, P. P. C. For having committed the murder of Mst. Dhayani daughter of Gul Mohammad and for having voluntarily caused simple hurt to Mst. Malookan wife of C3ul Mohd. By use of lathi. The appellant was found guilty of the offeaces charged with and was convicted under section 302, P. 1'. ;'. For the murder of Mst. Dhavani and was sentenced to death. He was also convicted under section 323, P. P. C. For causing, hurt to Mst.
Malookan and sentenced to R.
1. For one year. In case the death sentence of the accused was commuted he was ordered under section 544 (a), Cr. P. C. To pay com--pensation of Rs. 1,500 to the heirs of deceased Mst. Dhayani and in default in payment of compensation, he would undergo imprisonment for a period of four months. He was also ordered to pay further compensa--tion of Rs. 200 to the injured Mst. 'sialookan and in default, he would undergo R. I. For a further period of two months.
2. The conviction and sentences were challenged before the High Court in appeal and there was also a reference by the Sessions Judge for confirmation of death sentence. The High Court by its impugned Judg--ment dismissed the appeal and confirmed the death sentence.
3. The prosecution case as revealed by the evidence adduced at the trial is that Mst. Dhayani was daughter of P. W. Gul Mohammad and the injured Mst. Malookan is the mother of the deceased Mst.
Dhayani. Mst. Dhayani was betrothed to one Hashim sister's son of the complainant Ahmad Khan (brother of Gul Mohammad) about 5-6 years prior to the incident of murder. Miro, sister's husband of the appellant had demanded the band of Mst. Dhayani from her parents for the appellant about 10-11 years prior to the incident. After the betrothal with Hashim, the appellant appeared to have been aggrieved on account of it. On the day of the incident P. W. Mohammad Ali grand-uncle of Hashim along with P. W. Sardar Khan, a Nek Mard came to the house of P. W. Gul Mohammad to fix the date of marriage of Hashim with Mst. Dhayani. As Gul Mohammad had gone to neighbouring village, his brother the com--plainant Ahmed Khan requested the two visitors to stay with him until Gul Mohammad returned. In the evening Ahmed Khan went to give water from the well for his cattle when P. W. Mohammad Ali came running to him and informed him that while Mst. Malookan and Afst. Dhayani were at the cattle-pen and they were sitting in the courtyard, they heard the cries of Mst. Malookan. P. W. Mohammad Ali further told the complainant that he and P. W. Sardar Khan went running there and found the appellant armed with lathi inflicting blows to Mst. Dhayani who fell down. He further stated that Ust. kTaJook-an tried to intervene whereupon the appellant gave her two lathi blows. The appellant was challenged by Muhammad Ali but he made good his escape.
4. Leave was granted by this Court on the limited question of sen--tence , more particularly, to consider whether in the circumstances of the case the appellant should have been visited upon with the extreme penalty of death.
5. From the perusal of the prosecution case it is clear that there was hardly any motive for the appellant to kill Mst. Dhayani inasmuch as he had without success sought the hand of the lady in the marriage 10-11 years prior to the incident and about 5 or 6 years later, Mst. Dhayani was berothed to Hashim Khan, end even in relation thereto. The appellant had no ostensible grievance against her for there was nothing in the evidence to show that she had in any manner spurned the appellant. It is, therefore, difficult to believe that for this reason the appellant was pursuaded to go for Mst. Dhayani and put her to death. Mst. Malookan it may be noticed was not the target of attack but received injuries when she intervened to save her daughter. It would, therefore, appear that the real motive is shrouded in secrecy. In these circum--stances, the learned Advocate-General stated that interest of justice will be sufficiently met if the sentence of death is altered to life imprisonment.
We will, therefore, while not disturbing the other sentences alter the death sentence to life imprisonment.