SADIQ MAHMUD KHURRAM, J. --- Asghar Ali son of Khushi Muhammad and Ali Akram son of Khushi Muhammad r/o Chak No. 250, TDA, Tehsil Karor , District Layyah were tried, by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Karor District Layyah, in case F.I.R. No. 669 of 2009, dated 22.12.2009 registered at Police Station Fatehpur , under Sections 302, 365, 201 and 34, P.P.C. for committing Qatl-e-Amd of the complainant's son namely Muhammad Ahmad Siddique after his abduction. The learned Trial Court vide judgment dated 14.1.2012 convicted Asghar Ali son of Khushi Muhammad and Ali Akram son of Khushi Muhammad and sentenced them as infra:--
(1) Asghar Ali son of Khushi Muhammad .
(i) Death under Section 302(b), P.P.C. as Tazir for committing Qatl-e-Amd of Muhammad Ahmad Siddique deceased and pay Rs. 2 Lac as compensation under Section 544-A, Cr.P.C. and in default thereof, to further undergo six months of simple imprisonment. The convict was ordered to be hanged by his neck till dead: and
(ii) Rigorous imprisonment for seven years under Section 201, P.P.C. and to pay fine of Rs. 10,000/- and in default thereof to further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month.
(2) Ali Akram son of Khushi Muhammad.
(i) Imprisonment for life under Section 302(b), P.P.C. as Tazir for committing Qatl-e-Amd of Muhammad Ahmad Siddique deceased and pay Rs. 2 Lac as compensation under Section 44-A, Cr.P.C. and in default thereof to further undergo six months of simple imprisonment and
(ii) Rigorous imprisonment for seven years under Section 201, P.P.C. and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/- and in default thereof to further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month.
The sentences of appellants were ordered to run concurrently .
2. Feeling aggrieved, Asghar Ali and Ali Akram (convicts) lodged Criminal Appeal No. 67 of 2012 against their conviction and sentences. The learned Trial Court submitted Murder Reference No. 20 of 2012 under Section 374, Cr.P.C. seeking confirmation or otherwise of the sentence of death awarded to the appellant Asghar Ali. The complainant of the F.I.R. namely Muhammad Siddique filed Crl. Revision No. 118 of 2012 seeking enhancement of sentence of Ali Akram (present appellant) to death. We intend to dispose of Criminal Appeal No. 67 of 2012, Murder Reference No. 20 of 2012 and Crl. Revision No. 1 18 of 2012 through this single judgment.
3. Precisely the facts necessary , as divulged in the statement of Muhammad Siddique (PW -14) are as under:-- "Stated that Muhammad Ahmad Siddique aged about 13 years was my son and he was student of 7th class in the Educator School, Fateh Pur. On 20.12.2009 at about 11 at day time my son Muhammad Ahmad Siddique went from the house and till 2.30 p.m. he did not return upon which 1 was confused. On my query , Muhammad Yousaf PW who is my servant at the bird farm told me that at about 8.00 a.m. on that day, Asghar Ali accused present in the Court came there at the farm who inquired about me and then returned back. He further told me that at about 10.30 a.m. he again came there at the farm. At that time, Muhammad Ahmad Siddique was also present at the farm. They both were talking about the rabbits and in his presence, Asghar Ali accused called Muhammad Ahmad Siddique to come at his house all alone , and then they both left the farm and went outside. I alongwith Zia-ul- Hassan and Muhammad Riaz Pws went in search of Muhammad Ahmad Siddique and when we reached in the playground of chak, Muhammad Farooq PW met us there who on our query told that at about 11.15 a.m.
Muhammad Ahmad Siddique came at said ground and then he went towards north east side for taking rabbits. He further told us that he saw Muhammad Ahmad Siddique while entering into the "Havaili" of accused Asghar Ali. We continued search of Muhammad Ahmad Siddique on our own from the surroundings but he could not be traced.
Suspicion arose in my mind against accused Asghar Ali and Muhammad Khalid both present in Court upon which I contacted the accused but they had been making false statements. Ultimately , I informed the police on 22.12.2009 who recorded my statement Ex.PA which was signed by me. During investigation, Haji Abdul Hameed and Abdul Razaq PWs also joined the investigation and in my presence told to the police that on 20.12.2009, they saw Muhammad Ahmad Siddique alongwith accused Asghar Ali and Ali Akram on a motorcycle, at but Bus stop of Chak No. 250/TDA. At that time, Muhammad Ahmad Siddique was seated in-betw een both the accused on the motorcycle. PWs Pervaiz and Sarwar also made their statements during investigati on that on 20.12.2009, they also saw Muhammad Ahmad Siddique in the company of accused Asghar Ali and Ali Akram near Pull Dagar Shahi. The accused Asghar Ali and Ali Akram both made extra-judicial confession separately in presence of Zia-ul-Hassan and Abdul Khaliq PWs prior to their arrest and these PWs also made statements to the police during investigation on 22.12.2009, in the presence of PWs, I joined the investigation and produced before police mobile phone of my deceased son Muhammad Ahmad Siddique, P-1, with SIM No. 0343-7147802 wherein message of Muhammad Khalid accused present in Court regarding call of my deceased son Muhammad Ahmad Siddique in the ground hurriedly was contained which was taken into possession by police vide recovery memo. Ex.PG. attested by the PWs. As usual, my son had a wrist watch at his hand and he also used to have a golden chain with locket in his neck wherein his name Ahmad was engraved.
On 24.12.2009, accused Asghar Ali and Ali Akram while in police custody pointed out the place where after commission of murder of Muhammad Ahmad Siddique, his dead-body was thrown by the accused and from that place, accused in custody of police myself Zia-ul-Hassan and other inhabitants proceeded ahead and saw Joggers in still water in the canal and on seeing the same, accused pointed out that same was dead-body of Muhammad Ahmad Siddique. Then we all in the company of police took out dead-body of Muhammad Ahmad Siddique from the still water which was taken into posse ssion by the police and identified by me and Zia-ul-Hassan PW to be of my son. Police prepared memo. of identification of place of throwing of dead-body and place of recovery of dead- body Ex. PH attested by me and Zia-ul-Hassan.
On 03.01.2010, accused Asghar Ali was in police custody who led to the recovery of golden chain P-10 and golden locket P-9 which name of Muhammad Ahmad Siddique was engraved from an iron "Paiti" lying in his residential room. The aforesaid 'articles were taken into possession by the police vide recovery memo. Ex.PL attested by me and Zia-ul-Hassan PW. On 05.01.2010, accused Asghar Ali present in Court while in police custody led to the recovery of wrist watch of deceased Muhammad Ahmad Siddique P-11 from an iron "Paiti" lying in other residential room of his house which was taken into possession by the police vide recovery memo. Ex. PM. attested by me and Zia-ul-Hassan PW . My statement in this regard was also recorded by the police."
4. The learned Trial Court framed charge against the appellants and the acquitted the co-accused namely Kishwar Bibi and Muhammad Khalid on 27.10.2010 to which they pleaded not guilty and the learned Trial Court proceeded to examine the prosecution witnesses.
5. The prosecution in order to prove its case got recorded statements of as many as seventeen witnesses. Shakeel Ahmad, T/AS1 appeared as (PW-1) who on 22.12.2009 registered the F.1.R. PA/1 upon receiving the complaint Exh.P A. Aman Ullah 227/C (PW-2) took the dead-body of deceased for post-mortem. Haji Muhammad, Moharrar , (PW-3) on 22.12.2009 received Mobile phone of the deceased from the Investigating Officer and on 24.12.2009 the Investigating Officer handed over to him last worn clothes of the deceased. He further stated that the Investigating Officer handed over to him motorcycle, golden chain, locket and watch for safe custody on different dates.
Muhammad Aslam, Patwari (PW-5) prepared the site plan Exh.PG whereas Niaz Hussain Patwari (PW-6) prepared the site plan of the place of recovery of deceased PF. Ghulam Sarwar (PW-7) and Muhammad Pervaiz Akhtar (PW- 8) stated that on 20.12.2009 they saw the appellants with the deceased at 2.00 p.m. Muhammad Yousaf (PW-9) stated that on 20.12.2009 Asghar Ali complainant at 8.00 a.m. inquired about the deceased and then at 10.30 a.m. the deceased and Asghar Ali appellant left together in his presence. Muhammad Farooq (PW-10) stated that on 20.12.2009 he met with the deceased and saw him going inside the house of Asghar Ali, appellant. Zia-ul-Hassan (PW-12) and Abdul Khaliq (PW-13) stated that on 23.12.2009 Asghar Ali appellant and Ali Akram appellant confessed their guilt before them separately . Zia-ul-Hassan (PW-I 2) further stated that he alongwith Muhammad Siddique (PW-14) were present when the appellants pointed out the place of occurrence. Zia-ul-Hassan (PW-12) further stated that he alongwith Muhammad Siddique (PW-I 4) joined the investigation on 3.1.2010 when Asghar Ali appellant led to the recovery of gold locket P9 and golden chain P10 taken into possession through recovery memo. Ex.PL and then again joined the investigation on 5.1.2010 when Asghar Ali appellant got recovered watch P11, owned by the deceased, taken into possession through recovery memo. Exh. PM. Haji Abdul Hameed (PW- 15) stated that on 20.12.2009 he saw the appellants alongwith deceased on a motorcycle going towards Fateh Pur Muhammad Ishfaq (PW-16) stated that on 20.12.2009 at 11.30 a.m. he saw the deceased entering into the house of Asghar Ali appellant. Fiaz Haider , S.I., PW-17 recorded the statement of Muhammad Siddique Exh.P A and then started the investigation of the case and continued the same till 27.1.2010.
6. The prosecution also got examined Doctor Abdul Sattar (PW-4) who was posted at THQ Hospital, Karor as M.O. on 24.12.2009. On the said date Doctor Abdul Sattar (PW-4) conducted the post-mortem examination of the deceased Muhammad Ahmad Siddique and issued the post-mortem report Exh.PB. He observed as under:-- Dead-body of a male was lying on autopsy table with open eyes and mouth, wearing clothes wet having sand particles and mud. Metallic green jacket, brown shirt, brown pent, white colour hi-neck and joggers, with cold pale skin pink coloured hypostasis wrinkled hand and fee. There was no cadaveric spasm.
INJURIES
(i) There was lacerated 2 x 1.5 cm skin deep wound on external middle part of nose.
(ii) There was liquefied blood with, haematomae at the level of cricoid cartilage and upper part of trachea with shifting of traches to left side and compression of trachea with massive bruises in surrounding structures of neck.
There was no water in middle ear cavity .
On examination of thorax organs, there was no sand mud, froth vomits in larynx and trachea. No abnormality was seen on other organs of thorax. All the abdominal organs were also band normal.
On external and internal post-mortem examination, in my opinion, injury No. 2 was cause of death which indicated throttling and it was post-mortem drowning case. Throttling was ante-mortem.
Probable time between injury and death was immediate whereas between death and post-mortem was within four days.
7. On 18.5.201 1 the learned ADPP gave up PWs Tahir Mahmood, Muhammad Riaz-ul-Hassan and Abdul Razzaq being unnecessary . On 20.7.201 1 the learned ADPP closed the prosecution eviden ce after tendering the reports of Chemical Examiner Exh.PQ.
8. After the closure of prosecution evidence, the learned Trial Court examined the appellants under Section 342, Cr.P.C. wherein they claimed that they had been falsely involved in the case and in fact the deceased had committed suicide by jumping into the canal. Neither the appellants opted to get themselves examined under Section 340(2), Cr .P.C. nor they adduced any evidence in their defence.
9. On the conclusion of the trial, the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Karor , District Layyah convicted and sentenced the appellants as referred to above.
10. The contention of the learned counsel for the appellants precisely is that whole case is fabricated and false.
That the prosecution remained unable to prove the fact in issue and did not produce any unimpeachable, admissible and relevant evidence. He further contended that admittedly the occurrence was unseen and nobody had witnessed the incident of Qatl-e-Am d. Learned counsel vehemently argued that the deceased was missing since 20.12.2009 and his father Muham mad Siddique PW-14 was in knowled ge of the statement made by Muhammad Yousaf (PW-9) and still the matter was not reported to the police. The learned counsel argued that the delay in the registration of case was without plausible explanation. It was also argued that the statement of Ghulam Sarwar (PW-7) and Muhammad Pervaiz (PW-8) are contradictory to the stateme nt made by Muhammad Ishfaq (PW-16). Learned counsel further submitted that the alleged extra-judicial confession was fake and had it been so, the witnesses would not have let go the appellants. He also argued that the medica l evidence was not supportive of the prosecution case. He also contended that PWs examined by prosecution were related to the deceased and interested. He also argued that the recoveries were result of fake proceedings. He finally submitted that the prosecution has totally failed to prove the case against the accused beyond the shadow of doubt.
11. On the other hand, learned Deputy Prosecutor General alongwith the learned counsel for the complainant contended that the prosecution has proved its case beyond shadow of doubt by producing independent witnesses.
They further submitted that the delay in lodging the F.1.R. was natural as the first priority of the complainant was to locate his son and thereafter he reported the matter to the police. Learned counsels farther argued that the deceased was lastly seen in the company of the appellants by Ghulam Sarwar (PW-7), Muhammad Pervaiz (PW-8) and Haji Abdul Hameed (PW-15). They further argued that the appellants made a truthful confession of their crimes before Zia-ul Hassan (PW-12) and Abdul Khaliq (PW-13). They further submitted that it was on the pointation of the appellants that the dead-body was recovered and this circumstance alone sufficient for conviction. They further contended that the medical evidence also established the truthfulness of the confession made by the appellants.
They further argued that the recovery of articles of the deceased from the appellants also corroborated the ocular account. They contended that the appellants could not establish any enmity with the prosecution witnesses and there was no occasion for the prosecution witnesses to substitute the real offender with the innocent in this case.
Lastly , they prayed for the rejection of appeal.
12. We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant and learned Deputy Prosecutor General alongwith the learned counsel for the complainant and with their assistance perused the record and evidence recorded during the trial carefully .
13. We have observed that the deceased namely Muhammad Ahmad Siddique went missing on 20.12.2009.
Muhammad Yousaf (PW-9), who was employed by the complainant Muhammad Siddique (PW-14) at his farm, told him on the very day that the deceased was taken from the farm by Asghar Ali appellant in view of Muhammad Yousaf (PW-9). A perusal of the oral statement Exh.P A got recorded by Muhammad Siddique (PW-14) discloses that in the subsequent search they did not immediately go to the house of Asghar Ali appellant rather met with Muhammad Farooq (PW-10), nephew of Muhammad Siddique (PW-14), who was playing cricket in the ground. We have observed that as per prosecution evidence Muhammad Farooq (PW-10), met with Muhammad Siddique (PW- 14), on 20.12.2009 and told him that he had seen the deceased at 11.15 a.m. on the same day. This Muhammad Farooq (PW-10), while making his statement before the learned Trial Court and stated that he also saw the deceased entering into the house of Asghar Ali appellant through the gate of his haveli. During the cross- examination Muhammad Farooq (PW-10) stated that he made his statement befor e the police on the next day i.e. 21.12.2009. The F.I.R.. in this case was registered on 22.12.2009 and this portion of the statement of Muhammad Farooq (PW-10) reveals that the F.I.R. of this case was recorded after due deliberations and consultation. The errors pointed out in the case of the prosecution case magnify in their proportion in view of this. Here again we are constrained to disbelieve the prosecution account as even after getting this information from Muhammad Farooq (PW-10), the complainant Muhammad Siddique (PW-14) still did not confront Asgh ar Ali appellant. On the contrary it is recorded in the oral statement of Muhammad Siddique Exh.P A that he contin ued searching for his son in the vicinity of chak without ever confronting Asghar Ali the appellant. It is further mentioned in the oral statement of Muhammad Siddique Exh.P A. that suspicion was casted on Asghar Ali appellant and Muhammad Khalid co- accused (since acquitted). As has been mentioned earlier not only Muhammad Khalid co-accused has been acquitted but also that the statements of Muhammad Farooq (PW-10) and Muhammad Yousaf (PW-9) are opposed to human conduct. We have noticed that the learned Trial Court vide judgment impugned, acquitted the appellants for offence under Section 365, P.P.C. while observing that no sufficient evidence was available on the file to prove that Asghar Ali appellant abducted the deceased and to that extent the charge was not proved. No appeal against such acquittal recorded by the learned Trial Court from the charge under Section 365, P.P.C. has been preferred.
This also hits at the very root of the prosecution case.
14. Adverting to the statement made by Zia-ul-Hassan (PW-12) and Abdul Khaliq (PW-13) regarding the extra- judicial confession allegedly made by Asghar Ali appellant and Ali Akram appellant before them, we have noticed that they were not in any position of authority or influence so as to help the appellants in any manner , either before the complainant party or before the police. It was quite improbable and unlikely that the said appellants would have chosen these witnesses to confess their alleged guilt. It also seems unlikely that the appellants would seek their help in regard to effecting any compromise with the complainant. We have noticed that the reasons forwarded by the witnesses Zia-ul-Hassan (PW-12) and Abdul Khaliq (PW-13) for making of the said extra judicial confession was that if Ali Akram, appellant, is arreste d then the whole story would be unearthe d. This extra-judicial confession was being allegedly made on 23.12.2009 when the whole particulars were already in knowledge of the complainant Muhammad Siddique (PW-14) as per the statements of the prosecution witnesses. It was further stated by Zia-ul- Hassan (PW-12) and Abdul Khaliq (PW-13) that the reason for Asghar Ali, appellant, in making the said extra judicial confession was that he wanted to effect a compromise with the complainant. The witnesses Zia-ul-Hassan (PW-12) and Abdul Khaliq (PW-13) inste ad of procuring such a compromise readily became witnesses against Asghar Ali appellant, This also reveals the hollowness of the claim made by the witnesses Zia-ul-Hassan (PW-12) and Abdul Khaliq (PW-13) that they were approached by the appellants for making the extra-judicial confession as they were in a position to procure a compromise. Furthermore, if the said witnesses Zia-ul-Hassan (PW-12) and Abdul Khaliq (PW-13) could not procure a compromise, it is quite strange that then despite such disclosure the witnesses Zia-ul-Hassan (PW-12) and Abdul Khaliq (PW-13) also failed to apprehend the allegedly confessing appellants and admitted not to even have made an attempt at that. It is a funda mental requirement of law that extra-judicial confessions must be proved by evidence of a very high and unimpeachable character but we are of the opinion that there is no evidence of that character in the circumstances of this case.
15. For an extra-judicial confession to be treated as relevant evidence it is requirement of law that it should not only be made but should also be truthful. We have noticed that as per Zia-ul-Hassan (PW-12) and Abdul Khaliq (PW-13) the allegedly confessing appellant Asghar Ali while mentioning the details of the same stated that he (Asghar Ali) administered intoxicant to the deceased by preparing him tea, mixed with intoxican ts and the same was served by his wife namely Mst. Kishwar Bibi (since acquitted co-accused). It is further detailed in their statements that upon taking the tea the deceased become unconscious. We have observed that this portion of the extra-judicial confession relating to the serving of tea by Kishwar Bibi (since acquitted) has been disbelieved by the Trial Court at page No. 43 of its judgment. Moreover , the statements of Ghulam Sarwar (PW-7) Muhammad Pervaiz (PW-8) and Haji Abdul Hameed (PW-15) totally shatters the evidence of extra-judicial confession. In this respect Ghulam Sarwar (PW-7) and Muhammad Pervaiz (PW-8) stated that they had seen the deceased in company of the appellants and also that Ghulam Sarwar (PW-7) conversed with Asghar Ali appellant. Had the extra-judicial confession being true then both of these witnesses Ghulam Sarwar (PW-7) and Muhammad Pervaiz (PW-8) would have definitely observed that Muhammad Ahmad deceased was unconscious. Similarly Abdul Hameed (PW-15) also made a statement that he had seen the appellants alongwith the deceased going on a motorcycle. This witness Abdul Hameed (PW-15) again did not see that Muhammad Siddique was unconscious. Abdul Hameed (PW-15) had a good relationship with the complainant Muhammad Siddique (PW-14) however never reported the same to him on 20.12.2009.
16. The learned DPG alongwith the learned counsel for the complainant laid much premium upon the piece of evidence that the appellants led to the recovery of the dead-body of the deceased. Zia-ul-Hassan (PW- I 2) and Muhammad Siddique (PW-14) appeared before the Court with respect to proving this piece of evidence. A perusal of the statement got recorded by the Zia-ul-Hassan (PW-12) clearly establishes that none, of the appellants, led to the recovery of dead-body as the witness never deposed to this fact. The maxim um statement which has been made by Zia-ul-Hassan (PW-12) was that first Asghar Ali appellant pointed out the place of occurrence and then Ali AKram appellant pointed out the place where allegedly dead-body was throw n. A profound analysis of the statement of Muhammad Siddique (PW-14) also indicates to the fact that none of the appellants actually got the dead-body recovered. We have also perused the memo. of pointation Exh.PH available on the record. Exh.PH has been titled as "memo. of pointation" and not as "memo. of recovery of dead-body". For the interest of justice we have gone through the contents of the said Exh.PH, the said memo. of pointation. The proceedings as recorded as Exh.PH reveal that firstly Asghar Ali appellant pointed out the place of occurrence and then Asghar Ali appellant was made to sit in the police vehicle and Ali Akram appellant was brought who also pointed out the place of occurrence and ' then he too was made to sit in the police vehicle. This exercise conducted by the Investigating Officer (PW-17) can never be termed as .recovery proceedings. It is now an admitted fact that there is no memo. of recovery of the dead-body . There is nothing to ascertain whether the dead-body was recovered on the joint pointation of the appellants Asghar Ali or Ali Akram or by the witnesses themselves. Moreover , non-preparation of recovery memo. of the dead-body creates doubt in the prosecution case. Anothe r aspect of the case is that the place from where dead-body was recover ed was easily accessible by the people of the locality . In this case even at the time of preparation of the memo. of pointation Exh.PH, no person from the locality was associated with the proceedings in order to verify the same. In a binding judgment of the august. Supreme Court of Pakistan. Abdul Mateen v. Sahib Khan and others (PLD 2006 SC 538) it was pleased to hold that the discovery of dead-body on the pointation of accused would be highly doubtful if the prosecution failed to bring on record any memo. about the seizure of dead-body on the pointation of accused. Another aspect of the case is that a perusal of the said memo of pointation Exh.PH not only proves that the appellants did not lead to recovery of any dead-body rather also established that the extra-judicial confession of both the appellants suffers from an incurable error as there is no mention of the method if murder , throttling, in the said memo. of pointation Exh.PH.
17. We have observed that the recoveries effected from Asghar Ali appellant of the watch P9 belonging to the deceased and that of locket P9 and chain PIO from Ali Akram appellant could not be used as incriminating evidence against them in the case. The said articles are not mentioned in either the oral statement Exh.P A or in the statements recorded by the police on the day of registration of F.I.R. Exh.P A/1. Furthermore Muhammad Siddique (PW-14) admitted that he told the Investigating Officer, Fiaz Haider (PW-17), about the said chain and locket of the deceased on 3.1.2010 i.e. after twelve days of the occurrence.
18. We have also observed that regarding motive the prosecution did not produce any -independent evidence. A tainted piece of evidence cannot corroborate another tainted piece of evidence. No motive was mentioned at the time of recording of oral statement, Exh.P A, by the complainant Muhammad Siddique (PW-14). As we have already rejected the evidence of Zia-ul-Hassan (PW-12) and Abdul Khaliq (PW-13) regard ing the extra judicial confession allegedly made by Asghar Ali appellant and Ali Akram appellant before them, hence the evidence of motive contained therein cannot be considered. We are of the considered view that the prosecution miserably failed to prove any motive with the appellants to commit this occurrence.
19. The only other piece of evidence left to be considered by us is the medical evidence but the same is of no help in this case as medical evidence by its nature and character , cannot identify a culprit in case of an unseen occurrence: As all the other pieces of evidence relied upon by the prosecution in this case have been disbelieved and discarded by us, therefore the appellants convictions cannot be upheld on the basis of medical evidence alone.
20. Considering all the above circumstances, we entertain serious doubt in our minds regarding the involvement of Asghar Ali and Ali Akram appellants in the present case. It is settled principle of law that for giving benefit of doubt it is not necessary that there should be so many circumstances rather if only a single circumstance creating reasonable doubt in the mind of a prudent mind is available then such benefit is to be extended to an accused not as a matter of concession but as of right. Reliance is placed on the binding judgment of the august Supreme Court of Pakistan Muhammad Akram v. The State (2009 SCMR 230) in which it has been observed in paragraph No. 13 of page 236 as infra:--- "It is an axiomatic principle of law that in case of doubt, the benefit thereof must accrue in favour of the accused as matter of right and not of grace. It was observed by this Court in the case of Tariq Perez v. The State (1995 SCMR 1345 ) that for giving the benefit of doubt, it was not necessary that there should be many circumstances creating doubts. If there is circumstance which created reasonable doubt in an accused would be entitled to the benefit of doubt not as a matter of grace and concession but as a matter of right."
21. For what has been discussed above, Criminal Appeal filed by Asghar Ali and Ali Akram appellants is accepted, the conviction and sentence of the appellants awarded by the learned Trial Court through the impugned judgment are hereby set aside. Asghar Ali and Ali Akram appellants are ordered to be acquitted. They are directed to be released forthwith if not required in any other case.
22. Pursuant to the discussion made and conclusions arrived at above, the criminal revision No. 118 of 2012 filed by Muhammad Siddique, complainant seeking the enhancement of sentence of Ali Akram, is hereby dismissed
23. Murder Reference is answered in Negative and death sentence of Asghar Ali appellant is Not Confirmed.