' Muhammad Farooq convict has challenged his conviction and sentence through this Criminal Appeal No 522 of 2003. He was tried by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sahiwal in case FIR No, 36/2002 dated 07.02.2002 registered under Section 302, PPC at Police Station Harappa, District Sahiwal.
2. On conclusion of trial, appellant was convicted an sentenced as under: Convicted U/S 302(b), PPC and sentenced to imprisonment for life. He was held liable to pay Rs, 2,00,000/- as compensation in terms of Section 544-A, Cr.P.C. To the legal heirs of deceased and in case of default in payment thereof, to further undergo imprisonment for six months (S.I.).
3. FIR was got registered by Noor Muhammad son of Khuda Bakhsh. Prosecution story as narrated in the FIR is that on 04.02.2002 the complainant went to market for purchasing some grocery items leaving his wife and children at home. At about 04:00 p.m. Farooq son of Anwar came to house of complainant and started talking with Mst. Azra Bibi, wife of the complainant. During conversation, he slapped Mst. Azra Bibi and said that he will set her on fire. Putting kerosene oil on Mst. Azra Bibi, accused Farooq set the fire. Muhammad Raman and Hafiz Muhammad Azeem alongwith other residents of locality attracted on hearing noise, on which accused fled away. Body of Mst. Azra was completely burnt, who was shifted to hospital. Motive as set out in the FIR is that accused Farooq had illicit relations with wife of the complainant and on asking of the complainant, she restrained accused from visiting her house. Due to this grudge, accused set her on fire with intention to murder. FIR was registered initially under, Section 324, PPC. Mst. Azra Bibi later on expired due to injuries, on which Section 302, PPC was added.
4. Investigation of this case was firstly conducted by PW-7 Muhammad Raees Sub-Inspector, who recorded statement of Mst. Azra Bibi when she was admitted in the hospital in injured condition.
Thereafter, investigation was conducted by PW-8 Haq Nawaz ASI. He prepared challan under Section 324, PPC and after that the injured lady expired in the hospital. Charge against appellant was framed on 18.09.2002, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
5. During trial prosecution produced as many as twelve witnesses. Medical evidence was furnished by PW-9 Dr. Shafique-urRehman, PW-10 Dr. Nusrat Asad and PW-11 Dr. Rubina Zaib. PW-09 endorsed application as to fitness of injured lady for recording her statement. She was medically examined by PW-10 and after her death, post-mortem examination was conducted by PW-11. Ocular account was furnished by PW-4 Noor Muhammad (complainant), PW-5 Muhammad Ramzan and PW-6 Hafiz Muhammad Azim.
6. After recording prosecution evidence, statement of appellant was recorded under Section 342, Cr.P.C. Wherein he again pleaded innocence. In answer to the question why this case against him and why the PWs had deposed against him, appellant stated asunder: "It is a false case. PWs have deposed falsely against me on account of relationship with the deceased and enmity with me. The deceased caught fire accidently and it was so reported by her relatives at the time of her admission in the hospital. Subsequently the complainant party exhorted pressure upon the local police and after due deliberation and consultation for 4 days a false story was concocted and I was involved in this case to wreak revenge because the complainant party suspected that I had illicit relations with the deceased. I am absolutely innocent".
' Appellant neither opted to produce evidence in his defence nor he appeared in the witness box,as per Section 340(2), Cr.P.C.
7. At the end of trial, appellant was convicted and sentenced vide impugned judgment as mentioned above. Hence, this appeal.
8. Contention of learned counsel for appellant is that the prosecution in this case had failed to prove charge against appellant beyond reasonable doubt; that the appellant had no motive to kill the deceased Azra Bibi; that findings recorded by learned trial Court are not supported by evidence produced in this case, hence appellant is entitled to acquittal.
9. Conversely, learned Deputy Prosecutor General argued that appellant was the person who had caused death of Mst. Azra Bibi, wife of complainant and he was rightly convicted by learned trial Court as charge against him was proved beyond reasonable doubt.
10. Arguments heard and record perused.
11. This case was registered on the complaint made by Noor Muhammad, who while appearing as (PW-4) stated that on 04.02.2002 at about 04:00 p.m. He came to his house and found his wife burnt. According to PW-4, Ramzan, his maternal uncle and Azam, his brother-in-law and two women were present in the house. They took Azra Bibi to the clinic of Dr. Tahir who advised them to take her to Sahiwal. They took her at District Headquarters Hospital Sahiwal, where she remained admitted for eight/nine days. On 13.02.2002 she was taken to Meyo Hospital, Lahore where she died on 09.03.2002. Occurrence in this case had taken place on 04.02.2002. In his examination in chief PW-4 (complainant) did not state that in his presence the appellant had thrown kerosene oil on his wife. In cross-examination, PW-4 stated that police did not come to Sahiwal Hospital from 04.02.2002 to 07.02.2002. He further stated in cross-examination that his wife used to send love letters to the appellant. PW-5 Muhammad Ramzan stated that he went at the house of Noor Muhammad on 04.02.2002 at 04:00 p.m. And knocked the door and the appellant pushing the door aside, went away and at that time he was holding a jug in his hand, which he threw inside the house and ran away saying that he had burnt Azra Bibi. PW-6 Muhammad Azam also stated that Farooq (appellant) opened the door and ran away. They took Azra Bibi to clinic at Harappa and then to DHQ Hospital Sahiwal. In cross-examination, PW-6 explained that he did not make any statement before police or anybody else prior to 07.02.2002.
12. It is clear from statements of PWs that they remained silent for three days and then the incident was reported to police in which present appellant was implicated. PW-7 Muhammad Raees SI also stated that till 07.02.2002 it was not brought to his notice that Azra Bibi caught fire on 04.02.2002.
PW-7 in his first statement on 08.11.2002 before trial Court did not state that he had recorded statement of Azra Bibi. Later on he was examined on 25.02.2003 when he stated that he had recorded statement of Azra Bibi Ex.P-M. In cross-examination PW-7 explained that Ex.P-M was neither attested by any doctor nor by any respectable person. The evidence produced in this case by the prosecution clearly shows that the factum of burning of Azra Bibi was concealed in the beginning by complainant and other PWs and later on the matter was reported to police implicating the present appellant as accused. Even otherwise, present appellant had no animosity or against the deceased. It is case of the prosecution that she used to send love letters to appellant. Therefore, there was no occasion for the appellant to put her on fire.
13. On re-appraisal of evidence, I am of the considered opinion that prosecution had miserably failed to prove charge against the appellant. Findings recorded by learned trial Court were not, in line with facts established on record. Resultantly. Criminal Appeal No, 522 of 2003 is hereby allowed and appellant Muhammad Farooq is acquitted of the charge by extending to him benefit of doubt.
His surety stands discharged of the liability of bail bonds.