ABDUL KADIR SHAIKH, J.-The appellant, Chan Muhammad alias Channa son of Gul Zaman, aged 20 years, was convicted by the learned Sessions Judge, Karachi, on 28th September 1958, under section 302, P. P. C. For the murder of Mst. Safeedi Jan in her house situate in Bakra Piri, in the city of Karachi. The case before us is by way of the appeal filed by the appellant and also on the reference from the Sessions Judge, Karachi, for the confirmation of the death sentence.
2. The prosecution case may be narrated in the words of Mst. Shahnaz Begum, 10 years' old daughter of the deceased, which she spoke at the trial. The incident occurred at about 8-30 a.m., on the 11th October 1967, and this is what she said about what happened in her house that day :- "I was in my house and about to go to take lessons to the house of Miandad which is just near.
Accused Chan Muhammad is son of maternal uncle of my father. He was sitting on the charpoy. He used to come to us daily. My mother was washing utensils. Chan Muhammad accused was still there. My mother asked Chan Muhammad not to come to her house. Accused Chan Muhammad, took out a knife, got angry and stabbed my mother. In the meantime, my mother gave Chappal (jooti) to the accused. Chan Muhammad stabbed my mother. I and my mother raised cries. I was going to inform my Dadi. On the way I met Faiz Ahmad. He asked me and I told him that accused Chan Muhammad had stabbed my mother. Chan Muhammad accused was running away., P. W.
Dost Muhammad (Chacha Dosa) came to our house. P. Ws. Faiz Ahmad and Muhammad Din also came there. Y. W. Dost Muhammad enquired from my mother and she told him that accused Chan Muhammad had stabbed her. Faiz Muhammad also enquired from her and she gave the same reply."
2. P. W. Faiz Muhammad then went to Abdul Ghaffar, half brother of Hassan Ali, the husband of the deceased, and narrated the incident to him. In the meantime, the injured Safeedi Jan was taken to the Civil Hospital in the cart of Miandad. On the way she however, succumbed to the injuries received by her at the hands of her assailant. On getting the information that his brother's wife was injured by the appellant, Abdul Ghaffar went straight to Khadda Police Station to lodge the first information report which was registered at 9-20 a.m. With Muhammad Nishan, Station House Officer. While the Police Officer was recording the first information report, P. W. Faiz Ahmed also came there with the news that Mst. Safeedi Jan had expired. Accordingly the Police Officer went to the Civil Hospital where he conducted the usual investigation.
3. Doctor Muhammad Ramzan, who examined the deceased initially, and Dr. Muhammad Umer Khan, who subsequently performed the post-mortem on the body of the deceased noticed the following six incised injuries on the person of Mst. Safeedi Jan:-
(1) Neck at the roof just to the right up to clavical oblique in direction 3" x --" extending to the left side at the lower part of the neck, a portion i.e. 1" x --" x cavity deep. The rest is skin deep.
(2) Right side chest at 3rd inner coastal span 2" away from the mid line 1--" X --" x cavity deep vertical a little slanting.
(3) The wound is vertical and little slanting eppigastric region 5" above the umbilicus 1--" x --" x cavity deep.
(4) Oblique 2" below the nipple 1--" x --" x cavity deep on left side of the chest.
(5) Left side chest below anterior fold of axila 1-3/4" x --" x cavity deep.
(6) Right thigh in the middle vertical 4" x 1--" x muscle deep.
The internal examination also revealed extensive damage which heed not be described here for the fact that Mst. Safeedi Jan died as a result of these injuries with a weapon like knife in her own house is not disputed.
4. The appellant was arrested shortly afterwards by Ghulam Rasool, S, I. P., and he volunteered to produce the knife which he said he had used in the attack on the deceased. He then led the police party to the place of the incident and just near the entrance of the house of deceased he took out the blood-stained weapon from a box. It was secured under Mashirnama, Exh. 16, in the presence of Mashir Lai Hussain P. W. 8 and Nazar Gul. The clothes worn by the appellant were noticed to be blood--stained and these consisting of a Badami colour shirt and a white trousers were secured under Mashirnama Exh. 17, in the presence of the same mashirs. These three articles were sent to the Chemical Analyser and his report, Exh. 23, received subsequently showed that all these articles were stained with human, blood.
5. Apart from this circumstantial evidence, the prosecution case at the trial consisted of the ocular testimony of the victim's daughter Mst. Shahnaz Begum supported by four other persons, namely, Faiz Ahmad, Dost Muhammad, Miandad and Muhammad Din. The testimony given by Mst. Shahnaz Begum has been reproduced above and need not be reported for this young girl was not shaken in any manner in the detailed cross-examination she was subjected to by the learned counsel for the appellant at the trial. She was also supported by all the four other witnesses. Faiz Ahmad and Dost Muhammad, came to the spot almost immediately after the incident and they claim to have seen the condition of Mst. Safeedi Jan while she was still alive. According to them, the deceased also gave the name of her assailant as Chan Muhammad. Muhammad Din P. W. Carne to the scene shortly afterwards and was told that the victim was attacked by the appellant. The fourth witness, Miandad, stated that on getting this information from these three witnesses and Mst. Shahnaz Begum, he offered his cart and took the victim to the Civil Hospital but she died by the the they reached the hospital.
6. It was on the basis of this satisfactory and overwhelming evidence that the learned Sessions Judge rested the conviction of the appellant and rejected his defence version which merely consisted of the denial of the prosecution case in toto. All that the appellant suggested was that Muhammad Din was his enemy because he had divorced his wife who subsequently contracted marriage with his brother Manzoor and even otherwise there was an enmity between them' as his father had deposed against the father of the witness Muhammad Din in a poison case. In the cross-examination Muhammad Din no doubt admitted that he had divorced his wife but in this connection he said that she had remarried in some other village and he did not know if she was married to Abdur Rahman. He denied that she had come to Karachi with Abdur Rehman and stayed with Manzoor Illahi, a brother of the appellant. The allegation of poison case was also suggested to Muhammad Din in the cross-examination and all that h- said was that he did not know if his father was convicted for giving poison. He said that he was not even aware if the father of the appellant had deposed against his father in that case. There is, therefore, no substance in the allegation of the appellant suggested against Muhammad Din. It must be noted that the appellant was a son of stranger to the prosecution party for he was a, son of maternal uncle of Hasan Din the husband of the deceased.
There was, therefore, no reason for Mst. Shahnaz Begum, the young girl of the deceased to falsely implicate the son of maternal uncle of her father or for the other relation of her father, namely, Abdul 6haffar, to falsely depose against the appellant on a serious charge of murder.
7. We have, therefore, no doubt in our mind as to the guilt of the appellant which rests on the testimony of very cogent and reliable prosecution witnesses which is further supported by the fact of the recovery of the blood-stained clothes from his person within a matter of to hours of the reporting of the crime.
8. There is also no extenuating circumstances calling for imposing the lesser penalty than the one awarded to the appellant for the type of the cold-blooded murder he committed of his woman- relation. The only suggestion that has come from him is that he is a minor aged about 16 years. This assertion is totally false because according to the prosecution case as disclosed from the challan papers the appellant was 20 years at the the of the incident. This was also the age he himself gave to the Com--mittal. Court, and the age stated by him as 16 years subsequently at the trial and also in the memo of appeal is totally a false and to a new version set up only to get some benefit in the matter of sentence. This ground was not even, urged before the learned Sessions Judge and we have no hesitation in rejecting this false plea.
9. In the result, we dismiss the appeal and confirm the death sentence imposed on the appellant.