M. S. H. QURESHI, J.-Petitioner Liaquat Ali was found guilty by the Additional Sessions Judge, Multan, under section 302, P. P. C. For having committed the murder of his paternal-uncle Hassan Muhammad, deceased, and was sentenced to death plus a fine of Rs. 2,000.00 or in default in payment thereof to further R. I. For one year. His appeal before the High Court was dismissed and his death sentence confirmed vide judgment dated 9-7-1980. He seeks leave to appeal.
2. The deceased who was issueless owned some land. The petitioner and his father used to instigate him to turn out his wife so that they could get benefit of the land. This motive had led to the commission of the murder which took place on 12-6-1977 at 5-00 p.m. The deceased was at that time cutting gross in a field near his House while his wife Mst. Khair Bibi was washing her hands at the nearby watercourse. She heard alarm and on coming, saw the petitioner inflicting chhuri blows at the deceased. At her alarm Muhammad Shafi, Rahmat Ali and others came and managed to apprehend the petitioner at the spot alongwith the blood-stained chhuri. The deceased succumbed to the injuries at the spot. The occurrence was reported by Mst. Khair Bibi without delay. The Police arrested the petitioner from the spot and recovered the blood-stained chhuri and his blood-stained shirt and dhoti. The ocular testimony was furnished by Mst. Khair Bibi P. W. 6 who fully supported the case but the other two witnesses, namely, Muhammad Shafi P. W. 7 and Rehmat Ali P. W. 8 turned hostile. The recovery was supported by S. I. Abdul Khaliq P. W.
9. The petitioner's plea was of denial and false involvement by Mst. Khair Bibi. He explained that she was a woman of bad character for which reason the petitioner's party had been insisting upon the deceased to turn her out. Both the Courts below relied on the evidence of Mst. Khair Bibi as supported by corroboratory evidence. The plea that there being no evidence as to how the occurrence had begun and that the petitioner was only sixteen and a half at the relevant time was not considered by the High Court to constitute a mitigating circumstance and accordingly the conviction and the death sentence was maintained.
3. Mr. Talib H. Rizvi, learned counsel for the petitioner has urged that the evidence of the solitary witness was not sufficient to justify the conviction, that the medical evidence relating to the dimensions of the injuries was suggestive of the fact that more than one weapon had been used and as such did not furnish corroboration to ocular testimony and that in the absence of evidence as to how the occurrence had begun, the capital punishment was not deserved. We arc afraid the points relate to reappraise--ment of evidence which cannot be done. The question of believing or disbelieving of evidence is one of fact. No violation of any principle of law for appreciation of evidence relevant to the matter has been urged before us which could justify an interference by this Court. The petition is, therefore, dismissed.