ABDUL SHAKOORUL SALAM, J.-Muhammad Sibtain alias Ghulam Hussain was tried for the murder of Bashir Hussain under section 302, P. P. C. And causing injuries to Ghulam Raza, P. W. 7, under section 324, P. P. C. And was found guilty. He was sentenced to death under the first count subject to confirmation by the High Court and a fine of Rs. 10,000 under section 544-A, Cr. P. C: to be paid to the heirs of the deceased as compen--sation, if realised, in default to suffer further six months' R. I.
Under the second count, he was sentenced to two years' R.
1. And a fine of Rs. 2,000 to be paid to the injured, if realized and in default to undergo further six months' R. I., by the learned Sessions Judge, Muzaffargarh vide order dated 5-5-1979. He has filed Criminal Appeal No. 120 of 1980 and the case for confirmation under section 374, Cr. P. C. Bearing Murder Reference No. 175 of 1979 is also before us. Both are being disposed of by the following order;--
2. The case of the prosecution is that on 21-10-1978 at 9 a,m. In the area of Shahpur Dorata,' Police Station Leiab, District Muzaffargarh, the convict-appellant came to the dera of Bashir Hussain where persons had gathered for offering fateha for his deceased father Ahmad Khan who had died on 15-10-1979. He (the appellant) inflicted injuries on Bashir Hussain with chhurri p. 4 on account of which the latter died at 11-15 a m. In the hospital. The occurrence was witnessed by the complainant Ghulam Raza, P. W. 7, a nephew of the deceased, Muhammad Shafi, P. W. 9, brother- in---law of the deceased and Javaid Hussain, P. W. 8, not related to the parties. Abdul Hamid, P. W.
6 and Ikram Abbas (not produced) who were coming to the dera of Bashir Hussain, caught hold of the accused and produced him before Waris Ali, A. S. 1., P. W. 10 who recovered blood-stained chhurri P. 4 vide memo. Exh. P. H. And blood-stained shirt of the accused P. 5 vide memo. Exb. P. I.
Both have been found to be stained with -human blood by the Serologist vide report Exh. P. N. The motive alleged was that the convict-appellant had wanted the hand of Mst. Mumtaz Mai sister of the deceased but the latter bad refused to marry his sister to him and that two or three days earlier than the occurrence the appellant had quarrelled with Bashir Hussain and they were separated by Ali Muhammad and Abdul Hamid, P. W.
6. Dr. Manzoor Ahmad Malik, Medical Officer, Leiah, P. W. 5 examined Bashir Hussain and on his expiry conducted the post--mortem examination. He deposed about the six punctured wounds having been caused by a sharp-edged pointed weapon. He also examined the same day Ghulam Raza, P. W. 7 and found two punctured wounds on the right hand and right palm with a sharp-edged pointed weapon but the injuries were declared simple. After usual investigation, the appellant was put to trial and when he was asked as to whether he pleaded guilty, be said, "No. 1 do not plead guilty. My general relations with Bashir Hussain were imbued with love and affection but sometime we used to fall out with each other. But being cousins had again been returning to normal relations. However, I feel as it the deceased wanted to keep me under subjugation so that I may lead life under his control as a "Ghulam". 1 do not know how influenced by sentiments, I gave Bashir two chhurri blows. I did not injure Ghulam Raza P. W." At the conclusion of the trial, he was examined under section 342, Cr. P. C. And to the question as to why the case had been brought against him he replied "I do not know why the case has been brought against me". However, he produced evidence to show that he had been previously admitted into mental hospital. Dr. M. A. A. Aziz, Scortist Government Mental Hospital Lahore appeared as D. W. 2 and stated that he had admitted the appellant in the Mental Hospital on 19-2-1978. At the time of admission on examination, he found the appellant patient of toxic psychosis. He further stated that "the patient was found addicted to alcohol and was suffering due to the pressure of the high use of alcohol. Similarly he was found to be a heavy smoker". He opined that "the condi--tion which prevailed over Muhammad Sibtain was the result of excessive drinking and smoking. A few days after his admission Muhammad Sibtain bad become orientative and could distinguish the right from the wrong. When he was discharged from the hospital he was absolutely normal."
3. Learned counsel appearing for the parties have taken us through the evidence on record. We find that there is no doubt that the appellant bad killed the deceased at his dera with his chhuri and the eye-witness account and that of his arrest and recovery of the weapon of offence and his blood--stained shirt, leave no doubt that he was the person responsible for the killing of the deceased Bashir Hussain and also of causing injuries to Ghulam Raza, P. W.
7. Therefore, his conviction on the two counts is maintained, so also the sentence on the second count of causing injuries to Ghulam Raza, P. W.
7. As regards the sentence for causing the death of Bashir Hussain the matter has given anxiety and we have considered the question with great deliberation. From the evidence on record it is established that people were present for offering Fateha. It was day time at 9 a.m. The appellant is alleged to have come armed with a chhuri proclaiming that he would teach lesson to Bashir for his refusal to give his sister in marriage. The appellant and the deceased Bashir Hussain are closely related inter se. The conduct of the appellant, in the set of circumstances, is not normal in the sense that the occasion is solemn and grave, it is day time and there would be no possibility of getting away which is a natural desire of a person committing crime who does so intentionally, deliberately, with cool mind and planning. The appellant has been previously suffering from toxic psychosis. No doubt, the Doctor say that the appellant had recovered but the derange--ment of mind though set right is prone to tilt back under stress or sorrow. The deceased for whose fateha people had gathered was no body but the cousin of the appellant's father. It is not said that he was opposed to the marriage of his daughter with the appellant. May be, he was favourably inclined and after his death, the dream of ultimate marriage had shattered completely which unhinged the appellant again. According to the evidence of the complainant Ghulam Raza, P. W. 7, the appellant was standing near the witnesses. He took out chhuri from the dab and immediately opened the attack. As to what had happened which led the appellant to do what he did is not disclosed and is shrouded in mystery. The prosecution witness Ghulam Raza, P. W. 7 and Muhammad Shafi, P. W. 9, who are related to the parties and live in the same basti and would normally and naturally know about the mental condition of the appellant, have tried to suppress the truth and deposed against the medical record when they said respectively that "It is incorrect that Sibtain accused had ever become a mental case. It is wrong that the accused had remained in mental hospital", and that "It is wrong that the accused had once run mad or that he remained admitted in Mental Hospital". His mental illness had been diagnozed by Dr. M. A. A. Aziz, D. W. 2 at the time of his admission in Mental Hospital vide Exh. D. A., a record contemporaneously prepared. It is a genuine record made previously prior to the occurrence. Its authenticity is unquestionable. The reasons of the mental derangement given by the Doctor as excessive drinking and smoking which the learned counsel for the complainant stressed, are not germane to the question of his state of mental health. It was surely not such that he was a normal man who would do what he did in the set of circumstances as stated. Although the Doctor had said that the appellant had recovered, as observed earlier, but he had been got discharged by his brother on 26-3-1978 though he had been got admitted by the Meal Hospital in Mayo Hospital for apparently fracture of nasal bone few days earlier on 16-3-1978 (Exh. D. D. 2) Dr. Mohammad Ayaz Chaudhry had recorded on 13-3-1978 that the patient sustained injuries few days back about which it was recorded on 7-3-1978 that the patient had tried to escape and got injuries on the lower lip (Exh. D. D. 1). From the evidence on record, it is apparent that the appellant had been got discharged from- the Mental Hospital., and not that the Hospital had discharged him after full recovery. Therefore, the state of mental health of the appellant coupled with stresses and sorrow PLD 1965 Kar. 579 taken together with the fact as to what exactly happened which led the appellant to commit the crime which has not been disclosed, lead us to the conclusion that the sentence of death is not called for and a sentence of life imprisonment would meet the ends of justice. Therefore, sentence of death is not confirmed an is substituted for life imprisonment. Other sentences remain intact. Appeal and reference are thus disposed of.