Muhammad Anwar Bhaur, J.--The appellants, namely, Ghulam Abbas alias Jalla and Samar Iqbal sons of Muhammad Ismail along with Muhammad Ismail son of Jewana were tried by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Lahore for committing murder of Ijaz alias Jaj and murderous assault on Muhammad Imran-complainant, in case F.I.R. No, 275, dated 21.8.2003, registered with Police Station Barki, District Lahore for offences under Sections 302, 324/34 P.P.C. The learned trial Judge by virtue of his judgment dated 22.12.2005 found the appellants guilty of the charge, convicted them,under Section 302(b)/34 P.P.C. and sentenced them to death and imprisonment for life, respectively, with further direction to pay a sum of Rs, 1,00,000/- each to legal heirs of the deceased as compensation under Section 544-A Cr.P.C. or in default, thereof to undergo imprisonment for six months each. Benefit of Section 382-B Cr.P.C. was. however, extended to Samar Iqbal appellant.
The learned trial Judge by giving benefit of doubt to Muhammad Ismail acquitted him of the charge.
2. The convict-appellants by filing Criminal Appeal No, 2102, of 2005 have called in question the conviction and sentence awarded to them through the impugned judgment, whereas tho learned Additional Sessions Judge has sent the Murder Reference No, 106 of 2006 Seeking confirmation or otherwise of the death sentence 'awarded to Ghulam Abbas-appellant. Muhammad Imran- complainant by filing Criminal Revision No, 274 of 2006 has sought enhancement in the sentence of Samar Iqbal-appellant to the maximum. We propose to dispose of all these matters together through this single judgment.
3. Occurrence in the instant case took place on 21.8.2003 at 2.00 p.m., within the revenue estate of village Karbath Haveli, situate at a distance of five kilometres from Police Station Barki, District Lahore. Muhammad Imran-complainant (P.W.5) reported the matter to Ghulam Nabi, SI (P.W.13), at General Hospital, Lahore on the same day at 4.00 p.m., who as per his dictation reduced into writing complaint (Exh.PC) and despatched it to the police station for formal registration of F.I.R. On receipt thereof, Khalid Javed, AST (P.W.10) drew up F.I.R. (Exh.PC/1) on the same day at 5.30 p.m. without any addition or alteration on his part.
4. Succinctly the prosecution story as unfolded in the complaint (Exh.PC), on the basis whereof F.I.R.
(Exh.PC/1) was registered, was that Muhammad Imran-complainant (P.W.5) was resident of village Karbath Haveli and was an agriculturist; about 20/21 days before, Ghulam Abbas alias Jalla, Samar Iqbal sons of Ismail (the appellants) entered into an agreement to sell their land measuring three and a half acres for a consideration of Rs, 25,50,000/- per acre with Mashooq Ali & others and an amount of Rs, 50,000/- was paid as earnest money, but the appellants resiled from the deal; on 20.8.2003, the complainant and his maternal cousin Ijaz alias Jaj got settled bargain of the said land with a third party at the rate of Rs, 29,00,000/- per acre, but the appellants again resiled therefrom; on the fateful day, the complainant along with his maternal cousin Ijaz alias Jaj and Qaiser Abbas son of Fateh Muhammad met the appellants at Karbath Chowk in connection with the said deal, where hot words were exchanged between the parties; at about 2.00 p.m. on the assurance of Ghulam Abbas and others, the complainant along with Ijaz alias Jaj and Qaiser Abbas left for the house of the appellants while riding a motorcycle Bearing Registration No, LXO-
530. Honda-125 CC; Ijaz alias Jaj sat in the Baithak, when Muhammad Ismail (acquitted accused) emerged there and exhorted a Lalkara that he will not be let alive., whereupon Ghulam Abbas alias Jalla fired a straight shot through his .12-bore double barrelled gun at Ijaz alias Jaj, which hit on his back, who fell down; then Samar Iqbal inflicted him successive Dattar blows, which landed on right side of his head and left ear; the complainant stepped forward to save Ijaz alias Jaj, but Samar Iqbal also caused him a Dattar blow on left side of his head, who also fell down; due to fall, he also suffered an injury on back side of his head; on raising of Commotion by the complainant and Qaiser Abbas, so many people were attracted to the spot and on catching sight of them, the accused fled from the scene; besides the complainant, the occurrence has been witnessed by Qaiser Abbas and a number of other persons; meanwhile, on hearing hue and cry, Altaf Hussain alias Pervaiz son of Muhammad Sharif and Sagheer Ahmad son of Abdul Raheem also reached the spot, who took the complainant and Ijaz'alias Jaj in injured condition to hospital in a Pickup, but Ijaz alias Jaj succumbed to the injuries before reaching the hospital; the complainant was admitted to the hospital; Ghulam Abbas and others in consultation with each other have murdered Ijaz alias Jaj and caused injuries to the complainant in order to take his life; the complainant came across Ghulam Nabi, SI, Incharge Police Post, Hair, Lahore at General Hospital at 4.00 p.m. and lodged report of the incident. Resultantly, the aforementioned F.I.R. stood registered.
5. After registration of the case, investigation into the crime was carried out by Shabbir Ahmad, SI (P.W.11), who after completing the same submitted challan before the Court for trial of the accused in accordance with law.
6. On receipt the challan, the trial Court proceeded to frame a charge against the accused, to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. The prosecution in order to prove its case produced as many as fifteen witnesses, namely, Muhammad Shakeel (P.W.1), Aftab Alam (P.W.2), Muhammad Altaf Hussain alias Pervaiz (P.W.3), Muhammad Iqbal (P.W.4), Muhammad Imran- complainant (P.W.5), Qaiser Abbas (P.W.6), Hamid-ud-Din Chishti, Draftsman (P.W.7), Maqsood Ahmad (P.W.8), Arshad Ali, constable (P.W.9), Khalid Javed, ASI, (P.W.10), Shabbir Ahmad, SI (P.W.11), Muhammad Amin, ASI (P.W.12), Ghulam Nabi, SI (P.W.13), Dr.Tariq Zulfiqar (P.W. 14) and Dr. Muhammad Hamayun (P.W.15).
7. Learned Prosecutor closed the case of prosecution by giving up rest of the witnesses and tendering in evidence reports of Chemical' Examiner (Exhs.PN & PP), those of the Serologist (Exhs.PQ & PR) and report of Forensic Science Laboratory (Exh.PS).
8. Thereafter, the trial Court examined the accused under Section 342 Cr.P.C., who denied the allegations brought against them and claimed their absolute innocence in the matter. Ghulam Abbas alias Jalla-appellant while answering Questions No, 11 and 14 Stated as under:-- {{TABLE}} "Q.11. Why his case against you and why the PWs have deposed against you?"
Ans. All the PWs belong to complainant party, false story has been fabricated against us, what I did I did in my self defence.
Q.
14. Have you anything else to say?
Ans. I am innocent. I am submitting my detail statement black and white u/S 265 (F)." {{TABLE}} Whereas standpoint of Samar Iqbal-appellant was that he did not participate in the occurrence and the complainant has involved all the adult persons of my family in this case. Both the appellants did not opt to make statements on oath under Section 340(2) Cr.P.C. However, Ghulam Abbas alias Jalla-appellant opted to adduce evidence in defence and after tendering in evidence copies of certain F.I.Rs, order of Naib Nazim, Aziz Bhatti Town as Exhs.DB. to DI, order of Naib Nazim and Photostat of the licence concerning gun as Marks 'A' & 'B' closed his case.
9. Upon culmination of trial, the trial Court proceeded to pronounce verdict of guilt against the appellants, convicted and sentenced them as aforementioned.
10. Learned counsel for the appellants in support of this appeal argued that the F.I.R. in this case is a fabricated document having no value, as the same was recorded after deliberations and consultation; that there are material contradictions and improvements in the statements of the eye-witnesses; that the ocular account being contradictory to the medical evidence is not, trustworthy and cannot be relied upon for conviction of the appellants; that the motive part of the story as set out by the prosecution has not been established; that the story mentioned in the inquest report under the column "Mukhtasir Halaat Muqadama" is different from the story of the F.I.R., which suggests that the F.I.R. was not registered when inquest report Was prepared; that the place of occurrence is admittedly the house of the appellants and the deceased or the eye- witnesses have not been able to give, any plausible explanation for their presence in the said house; that it has been proved through documentary evidence that the deceased was a man of criminal character and a number of criminal cases were registered against him; that the deceased trespassed into the house of the appellants and as such he was an aggressor and Ghulam Abbas alias Jalla-appellant apprehending immediate danger to his life was left with no option but to kill the deceased in his self defence; that he caused only one fire-arm injury to the deceased and did not repeat the fire; that Samar Iqbal-appellant was not present at the spot at the relevant time of occurrence.
11. Learned counsel for the complainant opposed this appeal on the ground that the F.I.R. in this case was promptly lodged as occurrence took place on 21.8.2Q03 at 2.00 p.m., whereas the matter was reported to the police at 4.00 p.m.; that the ocular account in this case is exactly in line with the medical evidence and the prosecution has proved its case beyond any shadow of doubt; that presence of the eye-witnesses at the spot has not been disputed, rather it has been admitted and the plea of Ghulam Abbas alias Jalla-appellant that he killed the deceased in right of, private defence is neither probable nor convincing because if his plea is taken into consideration, he has stated that he caused a fire-arm injury to the deceased and thereafter caused injuries with Dattar, which are multiple wounds and, therefore, it is not probable; that Muhammad Imran-complainant (P.W.5), who is injured witness, has fully supported the prosecution case; that the complainant was medically examined at 3.40 p.m. and the doctor has stated that duration between the injury and medical examination was upto six hours and this period is covered within six hours, as such, there is no contradiction between the ocular account and the medical evidence, as pointed out by the learned counsel for the appellants that the Investigating Officer was not supposed to write the whole story in the inquest report (gxh.PJ) under the column meant for "Mukhtasir Halaat Muqadama" and only brief facts are required to be mentioned therein, which have been given and there is no contradiction between the details as mentioned in the said column and the F.I.R.; that a double barrel gun was recovered from Ghulam Abbas alias Jalla-appellant and an empty cartridge was found in the barrel and both (gun and cartridge) were sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory and the report was in the positive; that blood-stained Dattar was also recovered at the instance of Samar Iqbal-appellant and the report of the Serologist is that it contains human blood; that there is evidence of Wajtakar i,e, the statement of Muhammad Altaf Hussain alias Pervaiz (P.W.3); that case of the prosecution is even established from the suggestions made to the witnesses and the statements of the appellants recorded under Section 342 Cr.P.C.; that if the appellants are unable to substantiate the plea raised by them then there is no other punishment except the sentence of death. In support of his contentions, he has placed reliance on the cases of Mukhtar Ahmad v. The State (PLD 2002 SC 792), Toti Khan v. The State (2002 SCM R 1607), Muhammad Akbar v. The State and another (2004 PCr.LJ 514), Mst. Nazakat v. Hazrat Jamal and another (PLD 2007 SC 453), Ghulam Abbas v. The State (2008 SCM R 1352) and Abdul Kareem v. The State (2010 SCM R 589).
12.Learned Additional Prosecutor General Punjab for the State also supported the contentions advanced by learned counsel for the complainant and further submits that the plea taken by Ghulam Abbas alias Jalla-appellant is neither convincing nor probable and even three different stories were put to the prosecution witnesses during cross-examination, firstly it was suggested that it was a case of dacoity, secondly, it was suggested that the -deceased along with others came to collect Jagga and thirdly, the appellant acted in self defence, therefore, the version of Ghulam Abbas alias Jalla-appellant is not acceptable; that even otherwise the plea of said appellant is not acceptable because no weapon of offence was either recovered from possession of the deceased or any of the prosecution witnesses.
13.We have heard the learned counsel for the parties at considerable length and also perused the record with their able assistance.
14.It is a case of two versions, one put forth by the prosecution and the other by Ghulam Abbas alias Jalla-appellant in his written statement filed under Section 265-F Cr.P.C. while making statement under Section 342 Cr.P.C.
The prosecution case as set out in the F.I.R. is that Ghulam Abbas alias Jalla and Samar Iqbal the appellants had entered into an agreement to sell their land measuring three and a half acres with Mashooq Ali & others for a consideration of Rs, 25,50,000/- per acre and an amount of Rs, 50,000/- was paid as earnest money, but they resiled from the deal. Thereafter the complainant and his maternal cousin Ijaz alias Jaj deceased got settled bargain of the said land with a third party at the rate of Rs, 29,00,000/- per acre, but the appellants again resiled therefrom. On the day of incident, the complainant (P.W.5) along with his maternal cousin Ijaz alias Jaj and Qaiser Abbas (P.W.6) met the appellants at Karbath Chowk in connection with the said deal, where some altercation had taken place between the parties and abusive language was used. At about 2.00 p.m. the complainant (P.W.5) along with Ijaz alias Jaj deceased and Qaiser Abbas (P.W.6) went to the house of the appellants on their assurance while riding a motorcycle. When Ijaz alias Jaj deceased was 'sitting in the Baithak, Muhammad Ismail, father of the appellants (acquitted accused) came there and raised a Lalkara that he will not be let alive, whereupon Ghulam Abbas alias Jallaappellant made a fire shot through his .12-bore double barrelled gun, which hit Ijaz alias Jaj deceased at his back, who fell down. Thereafter, Samar Iqbal-appellant inflicted successive injuries with Dattar on right side of head and left ear of the deceased. The complainant stepped, forward to save life of Ijaz alias Jaj, but Samar Iqbal delivered him a Dattar blow, which landed on left side of his head, who also fell down; due to his falling, he also suffered an injury on back side of his head. The hue and cry raised by the complainant and Qaiser Abbas (P.W.5 & 6) attracted so many people to the spot, when the accused fled from the scene. The occurrence was witnessed by the complainant, Qaiser Abbas and a number of other persons. According to the complainant, on hearing hue and cry, Altaf Hussain alias Pervaiz (P.W.3) and Sagheer Ahmad P.W. (not produced) also reached the spot, who took the complainant and Ijaz alias Jaj in injured condition to hospital in a Pickup, but Ijaz alias Jaj breathed his last in the way to the hospital. The prosecution in order to substantiate the allegations brought against the appellants produced as many as fifteen witnesses, out of whom evidence of Muhammad Altaf Hussain alias Pervaiz (P.W.3), Muhammad Imran-complainant (P.W.5), Qaiser Abbas (P.W.6), Maqsood Ahmad (P.W.8), Shabbir Ahmad, SI (P.W. 11), Dr.Tariq Zulfiqar (P.W. 14) and Dr. Muhammad Hamayun (P.W. 15) is of prominent nature.
Muhammad Altaf Hussain alias Pervaiz (P.W.3) is a witness, who along with Sagheer Ahmad PW (not produced) on hearing report of firing from the house of the appellants reached there and saw the appellants, namely, Ghulam Abbas alias Jalla and Samar Iqbal while armed with gun and a Dattar and Muhammad Ismail (since acquitted) empty handed, coming out of the house. When they entered in the Baithak, they saw Ijaz alias Jaj and Muhammad Imran-complainant lying in injured condition. He took them to the hospital, however, Ijaz alias Jaj succumbed to the injuries in the way to the hospital. He was not an eye-witness of the occurrence, whereas he has furnished waitakar account.
Muhammad Imran-complainant and Qaiser Abbas (P.W.5 & 6) while appearing before the Court have reiterated almost the same story as narrated in the F.I.R. but made some improvements by stating that on 21.8.2003, when an altercation took place between the parties, the people of the locality intervened and separate them and thereafter on the same day at about 1.45 p.m. on the asking of the appellants to come to their house for negotiations, they along with the deceased went there while riding a motorcycle. Ijaz alias Jaj deceased entered the Baithak of the appellants and they followed him. The deceased sat on the cot whereas they remained standing there. When Muhammad Ismail (since acquitted) raised a Latkara that he should not go alive, whereupon Ghulam Abbas alias Jalla-appellant made a fire with his gun .12-bore double barrel at the back of the deceased, who fell down. The complainant again stated that he was going to fall and tried to control him when Samar Iqbal-appellant attacked the deceased with a Dattar, which landed on the right side, left side and top of the skull of the deceased. According to the complainant (P.W.5), when he stepped forward for the rescue of the deceased, Samar Iqbal-appellant also attacked him with the blunt slide of Dattar on his head and then he gave a blow with the butt of the Dattar at his chest, due to which he fell down; as a result whereof he also suffered an injury on the back of his head.
Maqsood Ahmad (P.W.8) has appeared to prove the factum of recovery of gun (P2) and blood- stained Dattar (P-3) at the instance of Ghulam Abbas alias Jalla and Samar Iqbal-appellants, which were seized by the Investigating Officer vide memo. Exhs.PE and PF, respectively, which were sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory and Serologist and the reports are in the positive.
Shabbir Ahmad, SI (P.W.11) was Investigating Officer of the case. He stated about all acts done and, the duties performed by him during the course of investigation.
Dr.Tariq Zulfiqar (P.W. 14) had conducted autopsy on the dead body of the deceased on 22.8.2003 and had observed following injuries on his person:-- I. Multiple incised wounds across the right ear and right temporal area measuring 8 x 2 cm with underlying bone exposed and fractured.
II. Multiple incised wound left side of head collectively measuring 14 x 10 cm present 2 cm from left ear and 9 cm from left eyebrow.
III. 3 incised wounds on back of ahead collectively 8x4 cm present 5 cm from Injury No, 2.
IV. Multiple fire-arm entry wounds on back of left chest with collar of abrasion in an area of 5 x. 5 cm present 16 cm below nape of neck and 33 cm above natal cleft and 2 cm from midline. The largest measuring 2.5 x 1.5 cm and sma llest measuring 1 x 0.7 cm.
He opined that the aforesaid injuries were ante-mortem. Injuries No, 1 to 3 were caused by sharp edged weapon, whereas Injury No, 4 was caused by fire-arm. The cause of death according to him was damage to vital organs of thorax under Injury No, 4 and damage to skull and meninges under Injury No, 1 leading to shock and death. Probable duration between injury and death was within few minutes and between death and post-mortem was 30 to 36 hours.
Dr. Muhammad Hamayun (P.W. 15) had medically examined Muhammad Imran-complainant on 21.8.2003 and found following injuries on his person:-- I. Lacerated wound 8.05 cm x bone exposed on left upper temporal region.
II. Contused swelling 4x4 cm on right occipital region of head.
III. Abraded swelling 5.4 cm on left lower chest.
According to the doctor, the injuries were inflicted within six hours and were caused by blunt weapon.
15.Appraisal of the aforesaid evidence reveals that although there were some improvements in the statement made before the Court by the complainant (P.W.5) and Qaiser Abbas (P.W.6), but their testimony is in line with the medical evidence furnished by Dr.Tariq Zulfiqar (P.W. 14) and Dr. Muhammad Hamayun (P.W. 15), who had not been cross-examined by the defence. The other piece of evidence is the recovery of weapons of offence i,e, gun (P2) and Dattar (P3) at the instance of the appellants. Gun .12-bore double barrel containing one empty cartridge recovered from Ghulam Abbas alias Jalla-appellant was sent to the Forensic Science Laboratory and the report (Exh.PS) received was that the crime empty of .12-bore marked as 'C had been fired from the right barrel of the .12-bore DBBL shotgun. Dattar (P3) recovered at the instance of Samar Iqbal- appellant was sent to the Serologist, who reported that the same was stained with human blood.
16.Motive set out by the prosecution was that the complainant party entered into an agreement with the appellants for purchasing a piece of land, but the appellants resiled therefrom and thereafter the complainant party got settled bargain of the said land of the appellants with a third party, but the appellants did not abide by their commitment again. Thereafter, on the day of occurrence, some altercation had taken place between the complainant party and the appellants, due to which the present incident occurred wherein one person lost his life and the other suffered injuries.
On the other hand, the defence version put forth by Ghulam Abbas alias Jalla-appellant in his statement given in writing under Section 265-F Cr.P.C. is that the deceased was a dangerous person of the village, who used to collect "Ghunda Tax", taunting the villagers and the womenfolk; a number of cases were registered against him. The appellant's father intended to sale out some of his agricultural land to one Mashooq Ali and received a sum of Rs, 50,000/- as earnest money. Ijaz deceased and Imran PW along with others had organized a group and used to demand "Ghunda Tax' from the persons selling their land. The deceased and the complainant also demanded their share from his father and on his refusal extended threats. Prior to the occurrence and on the day of occurrence Imran met him and his brother (the appellants) at Karbath Chowk and demanded money through illegal means, whereupon a quarrel took place between them. Imran received injuries. The appellants (Ghulam Abbas alias Jalla and his brother) returned home. Thereafter Imran informed Ijaz about the said incident. They along with 3/4 other vagabonds came to their house. Ijaz, who was carrying a pistol, entered into the house and posted the other armed persons outside the house, so that nobody could go outside. He (Ijaz deceased) while armed by entering into the house caused interruption in the housemates and has thus committed an offence. He while carrying a pistol in one hand and a Datter in the other raised a Lalkara that if his illegal share has not been paid, he will murder whole family members of Ghulam Abbas an nobody will let alive, so feeling his family members in danger, he (the appellant) took out his licensed gun and to save the lives of his family and himself made a fire from the window of his house, which hit the deceased. On report of fire, the companions of the deceased, who were standing outside, came inside and on seeing their comrade in injured condition, took him away along with his pistol. His father was outside the village at that time in connection with some piece of work. Thereafter, keeping in view the history of the deceased, he also caused injury to the deceased with Dattar which he (the deceased) had brought with him.
17. If both the versions are put in juxtaposition, the plea of Ghulam Abbas alias Jalla-appellant is not acceptable because of the following reasons:-- (a)He has stated that in order to save his life and life of other family members he resorted to firing, as a result of which the deceased suffered an injury and thereafter he caused injuries on his person with Dattar, but it has been suggested on behalf of the appellants to the eye-witnesses that at the relevant time of occurrence no other person was present in the house.
(b)He stated that the deceased was armed with a pistol, but there is no allegation that the deceased had used the pistol. Moreover no pistol has been recovered during the investigation.
(c)This appellant has stated that firstly he caused a fire-arm injury and thereafter inflicted Dattar blows, therefore, it is not probable that one person at the same time could cause injury with a fire- arm and then with a Dattar and that too in self defence.
(d)The plea of self defence raised by Ghulam Abbas alias Jalla -appellant does not find support from the material on record, as the complainant, Qaiser Abbas PW and the deceased did not carry any weapon at the time of occurrence nor any witness has been examined to support the same.
Even otherwise, the plea of self defence cannot be held to be plausible as the fire-arm injury suffered by the deceased at the hands of the appellant Ghulam Abbas alias Jalla was at his back which should have been on the front part of the deceased, if the deceased wanted to attack the appellant.
18.On the other hand, the prosecution has established its case that it were the appellants who caused injuries on the person of the deceased because the eye-witness account is in line with the medical evidence and it is further corroborated by the recovery of gun and Dattar and positive reports of the Serologist and Forensic Science Laboratory. The F.I.R. in this case was promptly lodged as the incident took place on 21.8.2003 at 2.00 p.m. in the area of village Karbath Haveli, which was situated at a distance of five kilometers from the Police Station (Barki Lahore) and the matter was reported to the police on the same day at 4.00 p.m. at General Hospital, Lahore.
19. Though it is correct that the story mentioned in the inquest report (Exh.PJ) in the column of "Mukhtasir Halaat" is not exactly in line with the story mentioned in the F.I.R., but in that column the Investigating Officer is required to give the brief facts of the case and all material facts have been mentioned therein, therefore, considering all the circumstances revolving around this matter, we have come to the conclusion that the prosecution has proved its case against the appellants, therefore, their conviction under Section 302(b) P.P.C. is maintained.
20.Insofar as quantum of sentence awarded to Ghulam Abbas alias Jalla-appellant is concerned, we have noted certain mitigating circumstances in this case, which are as under:-
(a) The prosecution has not been able to prove motive part of the story as the complainant (P.W.5) claims that he along with Qaiser Abbas and Ijaz alias Jaj deceased had arranged a bargain between a third party and the appellants, but they have not named the third party, whereas first party i,e, Mashooq Ali and others were mentioned in the F.I.R. but no one was produced. Reliance is placed on the case of Noor Muhammad v. The State and another (2010 SCM R 97).
(b) Prior to the occurrence, as per prosecution, the appellants met the complainant, Ijaz alias Jaj deceased and Qaiser Abbas at Karbath Chowk and an altercation between the parties took place, the eye-witnesses (P.Ws.5 & 6) claim that they along with the deceased were invited by the appellants to come to their house for settlement of the issue of sale of land, which is also improbable because the complainant (P.W.5) during cross-examination has stated that "On the day of occurrence Ghulam Abbas and Summar Iqbal met me and Iiaz at Chawk Karbath by chance at the time of first occurrence. They hurled abuses and Ijaz deceased slapped to Ghulam Abbas accused at Chawk Karbath. The accused also hurled (wrongly written heard and correction is ours) abuses to us." So from the circumstances, it can safely be inferred that the deceased and others in fact went to the house of the appellants to avenge the insult of the earlier incident and in their Baithak again an altercation took place and there was no premeditation on the part of the appellants, therefore, it appears to be a sudden fig Reliance in this behalf can advantageously be made to t e case of Muhammad Ibrar v. The State (2006 SCM R 1175)
Therefore, considering all facts and circumstances of the case, the sentence of death awarded to Ghulam Abbas alias Jalla-appellant is altered into imprisonment for life. The sentence awarded to Samar Iqbal-appellant is maintained: The order with regard to payment of compensation passed by the learned traial Judge against both the appellants shall remain intact. Benefit of action 382-B Cr.P.C. shall be extended to both the appellants.
21. This appeal stands dismissed with the above modification in the sentence of Ghulam Abbas alias Jalla-appellant.
22. Death sentence awarded to Ghulam Abbas alias Jallaappellant by the learned trial Court is NOT confirmed and Murder Reference is answered in the negative.
23. Insofar as Criminal Revision No, 274 of 2006 is concerned, the same is dismissed in view of the observations made herein above.