SAYYED MAZAHAR ALI AKBAR NAQVI, J.---Muhammad Azam Khan alias Niazi Khan son of Sher Khan, caste Pathan, resident of Chak No.17/ML, Tehsil. Piplan, District Mianwali (name of the appellant surfaced for the first time while dictating the judgment by the learned trial court and the appeal filed before this Court), appellant, along with Zohaib Hassan Khan (tried separat ely being juvenile), Muhammad Ramzan alias Bani and Khan Bahadur Khan (since acquitted) was involved in case FIR No.9/201 1, dated 18.01.201 1, offence under sections 302/34, P.P.C., registered with Police Station Piplan. The local police carried out investigation in which Muhammad Ramzan alias Bani and Khan Bahadur Khan, accused were found innocent. The challan of the case was submitted before the court of competent jurisdiction, howe ver, subsequently Muhammad Shehzad Khan son of the complainant of crime report preferred to file private complaint titled as:- "Muhammad Shehzad Khan v.
Muhammad Zohaib Khan, etc." under sections 302/34, P.P.C.. During the course of trial, cursory statements of the prosecution witnesses were recorded by the learned trial court and after taking into consideration the material available on record, the learned trial court summoned the respondents of the aforesaid complaint to face charge. After recording of evidence and taking into consideration the material available on record, learned trial court vide judgment dated 14.11.2014 convicted/sentenced the appellant in the following terms:- > Under section 302(b), P.P.C., sentenced to death with direction to pay Rs.5,00,000/- as compensation to legal heirs of the deceased in terms of section 544-A, Cr. P. C. and in case of default in payment thereof to undergo S.I. for six months.
2. Feeling aggrieved by the judgment of the learned trial court, the appellant has assailed his conviction and sentence through filing Crl. Appeal No.205 3/2014 while learned trial court forwarde d Murder Reference No.95/2015 for confirmation or otherwise of sentence of death inflicted upon the convict in terms of section 374, Cr.P.C.
Muhammad Shehzad Khan, complainant of the complaint case filed Crl. Revision No.444/2015 seeking enhancement in compensation amount inflicted upon the convict/respondent. As all the matters are arising out of one and the same judgment of the learne d trial court, therefore, these are being disposed off through consolidated judgment.
3. It is pertinent to mention here that firstly the crime report was lodged on the statement (Exh.PL) of Mushtaq Ahmed Khan brother of the deceased; wherein it was averred that he is resident of Dera Chhadru Khailanwala, Pakki Canal Piplan and involved in Zamindara. On 18.01.201 1 the complainant along with his brother Nasir Khan, Shehzad Khan son of the complainant and Muhammad Ishaque Khan son of Khan Ameer Khan, caste Pathan, resident of Chak No.18/ML while riding on Suzuki Car bearing registration No.3666/LRU went to bazaar Piplan for purchasing articles. The car was driven by Nasir Khan. At about 1:00 p.m. (noon) when Nasir Khan stopped car near Dubai Shopping Centre, the compla inant along with Shehzad Khan and Muhammad Ishaque Khan alighted from the car while Nasir Khan remained present in the car. In the meanwhile all of sudden accused (1) Zohaib Khan son of Khan Bahadur armed with kalashnikov , (2) Niazi Khan son of Sher Khan armed with kalashnikov , (3)
Khan Bahadur Khan son of Sher Khan armed with rifle .44-bore, all Pathan Rasha by caste and residents of Chak No.17/ML along with one unknown accused person armed with rifle (kalashnikov numa) while riding on two motorcycles reached there. Zohaib Khan raised lalkara to teach lesson for insulting Shair Khan. On seeing the accused persons heading towards him, Nasir Khan opened the gate of the car and tried to come out on which Zohaib Khan, Niazi Khan, Khan Bahadur and unknown accused reached near the car and made indiscriminate firing upon Nasir Khan from a close range, which resulted into injuries at chest, belly, both legs and hand. The complainant party being empty handed did not step forward due to fear. The accused persons while riding on motorcycles fled away towards eastern side. When the complainant and others saw Nasir Khan, he had already succumbed to the injuries.
Motive behind the occurrence as disclosed in the crime report was stated to be previous enmity between both sides. Due to this grudge Zohaib Khan, Niazi Khan, Khan Bahadur along with one unknown accused person committed the occurrence.
4. In order to report the matter to police, complainant reached Police Station where he made his statement before Noor Muhammad, S.I. (CW-1) on the basis of which FIR was chalked out. Thereafter Investigating Officer visited the place of occurrence and after inspecting the dead body he prepared injury statement (Exh.PD), drafted inquest report (Exh.PE) and dispatched the dead body to mortuary under the escort of Muhammad Bashir 129/C (PW-3).
He took into possession one piece of seat of the car (blood stained) vide recovery memo Exh.PG. During the spot inspection Investigating Officer collected eight crime empty bullets of kalashniko v vide recovery memo Exh.PJ.
Suzuki Car bearing registration No.LRU/3666 was secured vide recovery memo Exh.PK. Rifle .8-MM along with three magazines and 30 live bullets and a license in the name of deceased Nasir Khan was taken into possession vide recovery memo Exh.PH. After postm ortem examination last worn clothes of the deceased shalwar (P-1), shirt (P-3) and bunyan (P-3) were taken into possession vide recovery memo Exh.PB. On the direction of the Investigating Officer and pointing out the PWs, on 22.01.201 1, Muhammad Shafique, Draftsman (PW-2) took rough notes of the place of occurrence and thereafter prepared scaled site plan (Exh.P A and Exh.P A/1), which was made part of the file. On 03.02.1201 1, Investigating Officer arrested the appellant and obtained his physical remand.
During the course of interrogation in pursuance of disclosure on 11.02.201 1 appellant led to the recovery of kalashnikov along with two magazines, which the Investigating Officer took into possession vide recovery memo Exh. P0.
5. As a result of investigation, the appellant was found guilty , hence Investigating Officer prepared report under section 173, Cr.P.C. while placing his name in column No.3, and sent the same to the Court of Session en-routed through the Illaqa Magistrate as provided under section 190(2), Cr.P.C. However , Muhammad Shehzad Khan (PW- 6) son of the complainant of the FIR preferred to file private complaint. In the comp laint, accused were summoned and thereafter on 30.05.2012 charge was framed to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. Prosecution in order to substantiate its case produced as many as nine (9) prosecution witnesses while CW-1 also made statement.
6. Occular account in this case consists of the statements of Muhammad Shehzad Khan (PW-6) and Muhammad Ishaque (PW-7). Muhammad Bashir'129/C (PW-3) had escorted dead body to mortuary while Muhammad Shafique, Draftsman (PW-2) had prepared scaled site plan of the place of occurrence. In addition to lodging crime report Noor Muhammad, S.I. (CW -1) had also conducted investigation of this case.
Dr. Sana Ullah Malik (PW-5) had conducted postmortem examination over the dead body of deceased and observed following injuries on his person:- "1. A fire arm entry wound measuring 9.5 x 4 cm with burning and blackening around the margins was present on the front side of the right of the chest 6 cm below the tip of right shoulder .
2. A fire arm entry wound measuring 6 x 3 cm with burning and blackening around the margin was present on the right side of the front of chest, 6 cm below the injury No. 1.
3 A fire arm entry wound measuring 2 x 1 cm with burning and blackening around the margin was present on the right side of the front of the chest, 5 cm above from the right nipple.
4. A fire arm exit wound measuring 1.5 x 1 cm was present on the front side of right of chest, 6 cm below the injury No.3.
5. A fire arm entry wound with burning and blackening around the margins, measuring 3 x 2 cm was present on the front side of the right of chest, 6 cm above and inward right nipple.
6. A fire arm entry wound measuring 5 x 3 cm with burning and blackening around the margin was present on the middle part of the chest 1 1 cm above from left nipple.
7 A fire arm entry wound measuring 2 x 2 cm was present on the middle part of the chest, 1 cm below the injury No.6 with burning and blackening around the margin.
8. A fire arm entry wound with burning and blackening around the margin measuring 2 x 1 cm was present on the middle part of the chest, 1 cm below the injury No.7.
9. A fire arm entry wound measuring 3 x 1.5 cm with burning and blackening aroun d the margin was present on the left side of front of chest, 6 cm inward from the left nipple and 3 cm below injury No.8.
10. A fire arm entry wound measuring 2.5 x 1 cm with burning and blackening was present on the right side of front of chest, 6 cm inward from the right nipple.
11. A fire arm entry wound measuring 5 x 2 cm with burning and blackening present on the abdomen, 6 cm above from the umbilicus.
12. A complex of fire arm exit wound (four in number) each measuring 1 x 1.5 cm was present in an area of 6 x 10 cm on the back side of right shoulder and back of chest.
13. A fire arm tangential wound measuring 2 x 1 cm was present on the left nostril.
14. A fire arm entry wound 3 x 2 cm was present on the right side of the neck, 7 cm below chin.
15. A complex of fire arm entry wound (4 in number) was present on the front side of left thigh, knee joint and left leg in an area of 36 x 9 cm with burning and blackening around the margin.
16. A fire arm exit wound (complex 3 in number) present in an area of 10 cm on the outer side of the left leg.
17. A fire arm entry wound measuring 5 x 2 cm was, present on the inner side of right thigh with burning and blackening, 10 cm above from the knee joint.
18. A fire arm exit wound 2 x 1 cm was present on the inner side of right thigh, 8 cm from the right knee joint.
19. A fire arm entry wound 2 x 2.5 cm was present on the outer side of the right arm 11 cm below the tip of the shoulder .
20. A fire arm exit wound measuring 1 x 1 cm was present on the inner side of the right arm 10 cm below the right axilla.
21. A fire arm entry wound measuring 6 x 1 cm was present on the back side of the left hand, 12 cm above from the tip of the index finger .
22. A fire arm exit wound measuring 7 x 2 cm was present on the inner side of the left hand.
23. A fire arm tangential wound measuring 3 x 1 cm was present on the back side of left hand just below the left wrist joint."
After conducting postmortem examination, doctor rendered the following opinion:- "In my opinion death was occurred due to collective effect of all above said injuries i.e. from 1 to 23 especially injury Nos.1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12 which caused severe damage to major organs. Leading to massive haemorrhage and shock and cardio pulmonary arrest. All above said injuries were ante mortem in nature and were sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature and all were caused by fire arm. The probable time which elapsed between injury and death was instant (sudden) and between the death and postmortem was within six hours."
Statements of rest of the prosecution witnesses are formal in nature.
7. The appellant was examined under section 342, Cr.P.C., wherein he refuted the allegations levelled against him in the prosecution evidence. While replyin g to the question why this case against him and why the PWs deposed against him, the appellant made the following deposition:- "The so-called prosecution witnesses were not present at the place of occurrence. The deceased was done to death by unknown assailants as he was having enmities with many persons. The PWs have falsely deposed against me as they were inimical towards me."
8. Learned trial court after evaluating the evidence available on record, found version of the prosecution proved beyond shadow of reasonable doubt against the appellant, which resulted into his conviction in the afore-stated terms.
9. Learned counsel for the appellant at the outset contended that impugned judgment has been passed by the learned trial court in a slipshod manner without adverting to real facts of the case and material available on record.
Learned counsel vehemently argued it is a case of unique nature in which actual name of the appellant has not surfaced on record throughout the investigation and even while framing of charge the same was not mentioned accurately . So much so the private complaint was filed with a delay of one year and even then correct name of the appellant was not mentioned. Main crux of arguments of learned counsel for the appellant is that although the FIR was promptly lodged, however , it reflects swiftness at the part of the police and the same itself creates doubt about the credence of the prosecution version. Further contended that the delayed dispatching of dead body to mortuary further creates dent in the genuineness of the prosecution case. It was argued that presence of the prosecution witnesses at the place of occurrence at the relevant time is highly doubtful and story advanced through their statements does not appeal to reason. As far as medical evidence is concerned, it was argued that at the time of conducting postmortem examination, doctor observed duration between death and postmortem examination as six hours which is suggestive of the fact that the occurrence had taken place around 9:00/9:30 a.m. As far as report of Forensic Science Laboratory with regard to kalashnikov allegedly recovered from the appellant is concerned, it was argued that the transmission of the weapon was not established, therefore, the same is devoid of any legal credence. Learned counsel vigorously argued that the deceased was a person of clandestine character , who was having enmity with so many persons and even involved in number of criminal cases. Further argued that even during the course of investigation it came into limelight that two persons with muffled faces committed the occurrence as such possibility cannot be ruled out that due to sectarian background the deceased was murdered by unknown persons. Moreover , two accused with similar role were acquitted of the charge on the same set of evidence and no appeal against their acquittal was filed, hence, conviction and sentence recorded against the appellant is not sustainable in the eyes of law .
10. On the other hand learned Deputy Prosecutor General assisted by learne d counsel for the complainant vehemently opposed the contentions raised by learned counsel for the appellant. It was argued that the appellant is duly named in the promptly lodged FIR with the role of making firing and during the occurrence son of the complainant was done to death in a brutal manner . Learned counsel for the comp lainant argued that both parties being previously known to each other question of mistaken identity does not arise. Further argued that both the prosecution witnesses of occular account while making their statements during the course of trial fully established the prosecution case on minute details. Moreover , medical evidence corroborates the prosecution case. Learned Law Officer argued that during the course of investigation kalashnikov was recovered and report of the concerned quarter (Exh.PZZ) is positive. Although the fact of transmission of the crime weapon (kalashnikov) is missing, however , this fact alone does not create any dent in the prosecution version. It was argued that the appellant had committed the occurrence with strong motive, who was also found guilty during the course of investigation. Finally it was argued by learned counsel for the complainant that if the fact that the name of the appellant was not correctly mentioned in the police record, as well as, at the time of framing of charge is taken into consideration, at the most the case is liable to be remanded for re framing of charge, hence, it cannot be taken as a ground for recording acquittal in favour of the accused.
While arguing Crl. Revision No.444/2015, learned counsel for the petitioner/complainant submitted that the deceased was a young man, who was done to death due to reckless firing made by the convict/ respondent along with other assailants; hence, the amount of compensation is liable to be enhanced.
11. Arguments advanced from both sides have been heard. We have also minutely gone through the record available on file with the able assistance of learned counsel for the parties.
12. It is an established principle of law that each criminal case has its own peculiar facts and circumstances and the same seldom coincide with each other on salient features, however , the case in hand is of unique nature due to certain/specific facts. There is no denial to this fact that the occurrence had taken place broad day light in which brother of the complainant was done to death in a very reckless manner; wherein as many as twenty three injuries were inflicted upon the person of deceased including fifteen entry wounds. However , the injuries may reflect severity of the crime but it cannot disclose the identity of the assailants. Moreover , it is bounden duty of the Court to evaluate the facts and circumstances and the material available on record in order to ascertain whether the same is sufficient to maintain conviction in a case of capital punishment.
Perusal of the record clearly reveals that in this case the crime report was lodged with extraordinary promptness as the Police Station was very close to the place of occurrence and it might advance the prosecution version regarding its genuineness, however , evacuation of the dead to the hospital with an inordinate delay creates reasonable suspicion. When both of these aspects are evaluated while putting them in juxtaposition it leaves wide room in estimating the other evidence/material available on record. Apart from this it is an admitted fact that while lodging the crime report, the main accused was dubbed as Niazi Khan, who happens to be appellant before this Court. Besides Niazi Khan, three other accused were also ascribed overt act towards murder of the deceased. The name of said Niazi Khan never surfaced during the course of investigation, at the time of framing of charge and even when the complainant opted to file Private complaint, however , finally , when the judgment was pronounced suddenly it was recorded against Muhammad Azam Khan alias Niazi Khan and he was sentenced to capital punishment. It is an admitted fact that during the course of proceedings before the learned trial court, the appellant got exhibited certain documents viz: (1) copy of school leaving certificate (Exh.DF), (2) copy of CNIC (Exh.DG), (3) copy of marriage registration certificate (Exh.DH), and (4) copy of armed license (Exh.DJ); to substantiate his claim that he is well known right from his childhood as Muhammad Azam, however , this aspect was never brought on record till the pronouncement of the judgment. In these circumstances possibility cannot be ruled out that name was gathered from the documents produced by the appellant before the learned trial court in his defence and final adjudication was carried out against him.
13. As far as occular account is concern ed the same has been advanced through the statements of Muhammad Shehzad Khan (PW-6) and Muhammad Ishaque (PW-7). Perusal of their statements reflects that both of them have tried to establish their presence at the place of occurrence at the relevant time. However , as far as mode and manner of occurrence are concerned, Muhammad Shahzad Khan (PW6) while making his statement during the course of trial stated that when they alight ed from the car, the accused approached there and on seeing them Nasir Khan tried to come out of the car but the accused resorted to firing upon him. He also stated that no fire shot hit the deceased when he was inside the car whereas on arrival of the police the dead body was lying on the cot. Relevant extracts out, of his statement are reproduced as under:- "Fire hit the deceased when he was coming out from the car . No fire hit the deceased when he was inside the, car ."
"When police arrived dead body was on the cot."
It is an admitted fact that the occurrence had taken place in the market/bazaar , however , there is nothing on record that from where the cot was made availab le and who put/placed the dead body over the cot. Similar is the position with regard to statement of Muhammad Ishaque (PW-7). The Investigating Officer (Noor Muhammad, SI/CW -1) while making his statement during the course of trial, however , has contradicted the prosecution witnesses of occular account on this score. He while appearing in the witness-box stated that when he visited the place of occurrence, the dead body was lying inside the car/Relevant portion of his statement is reproduced as under:- "When I visited the site, dead body was lying inside the car"
Both the prosecution witnesses of the occular account also claimed that soon after the occurrence, they had attended the deceased and during this process their clothes were stained with blood. However , astonishingly they did not either show these clothes to the Investigating Officer nor those were taken into possession to substantiate this aspect of the case. It is also an admitted fact that soon after approaching the place of occurrence, the Investigating Officer inspected the dead body and prepared inquest report in the presence of Muhammad Ameer Khan son of Muhammad Hayat Khan and Muhammad Iqbal son of Abdul Rehman. However , their names do not reflect in the crime report as witnesses. This fact also casts doubt about the truthfulness of the prosecution story and presence of the prosecution witnesses at the place of occurrence at the relevant time.
14. Another important aspect of the case is that according to prosecution own version when the assailants had reached the place of occurrence they firstly raised lalkara and when Nasir Khan tried to come out of the car, they opened firing upon him. However , it has come on record that the deceased was having enmity with so many persons and even on the day of occurren ce he was having rifle with him along with plenty of bullets, which were taken into possession by the Investigatin g Officer at the time of spot inspection. This fact finds mention in the statement of Muhammad Shehzad Khan (PW -6) in the following terms:- "It is correct that at the time of murder of deceased he was keeping rifle .8-MM with 30 live bullets with three magazines."
If the mode and manner of occurrence as depicted in the statements of the prosecution witnesses is taken into consideration it does not appeal to reason that when the deceased was having sufficient firearms with him why he didn't try to make his escape under the shelter of making firing upon the assailants. Even otherwise the prosecution witnesses of the occular account are unanimous that there existed enmity over murders between both sides. This fact also stands mention in the statement of Muhammad Ishaque (PW-7). There could not be any second thought about recklessness of the assailants which resulted into serious injuries to the deceased (total 23 in number including 15 entry wounds), who met his instantaneous death. It knocks mind of the Court that if the assailants were so carefree in commission of offence why they spared both the prosecution witnesses, who were present nearby and were of equal importance for them to fulfill their design of eliminating them. Keeping in view the afore- stated facts and circumstances, this Cour t is of the view that the version advanced through the statements of PW- 6, and PW-7 seems to be tainted, not inspiring confidence and result of due delibe rations and consultations, hence the same cannot be given any legal credence.
15. Apart from the occular account, which was furnished against Niazi Khan and the same was squarely denied, the learned trial court while adjudicating the case acquitted two out of four accused, who were ascribed overt act qua inflicting injuries on the person of deceased. Admittedly conclusion drawn by the learned trial court was not challenged by the complainant before this Court. It is an established principle of law that whenever the court has to distinguish the case of any one amongst others while applying the principle of sifting the grain from the chaff, it is essential for the court to seek independent corroboration. Though the learned trial court tried to establish the case against the appellant on the basis of report of Forensic Science Laboratory (Exh.PZZ) with regard to recovery of kalashnikov from him, however , perusal of record reflects that at the time of making his statement, Zahid Umar 157/C (PW-8), who had allegedly transmitted the parcel to Forensic Science Laboratory , had not deposed this fact.
Admittedly he was not declared hostile. Hence, this fact straightway smashes the prosecution version.
16. As far as medical evidence in this case is concerned admittedly the appellant has not been ascribed any specific overt act rather generalized role has been assigned to him along with other co-accused. Record available on file reflects that the occurrence is stated to have taken place on 18.01.201 1 at 1:00 p.m. whereas the doctor conducted postmortem examination at 3:30 p.m.; wherein he observed that duration H between death and postmortem examination was six hours. So much so the doctor while appearing in the witness-box admitted that in view of his observation qua duration between death and postmortem examination as embodied in the postmortem examination report, time of occurrence could be 9:00/9:30 a.m. Relevant extract out of his statement is reproduced as under:- "Since I have written in my postmortem report that duration between death and postmortem was six hours, therefore, it can be started from 9 or 9:30 a.m."
This fact straightway hits the roots of the prosecution version.
17. Perusal of record available on file further reflects that the deceased was a person of clandestine character as he was involved in so many criminal cases. So much so the Investigating Officer while appearing in the witness- box stated that on his first visit to the spot he had interrogated the shopkeepers of the nearby shops and during the course of investigation it came to limelight that two persons riding on a motorcy cle approached the spot out of whom one was armed with kalashnikov , who made firing and thereafter both of them fled away from the scene of occurrence. Relevant extract out of his statement is reproduced as under: - "On first visit I interrogated the shop keepers whose shops are there in surrounding s of the place of occurrence. On my first visit I interrogated Muhammad Shakoor son of Haji Abdul Ghafoor , Muhammad Adnan son of Ehsan-ul- Haq, Ehsan-ul-Haq son of Muhammad Anwar ,. Muhammad Rauf son of Haji Abdul Ghafoor and Khalid son of Muhammad Nawaz and all they stated that one accused was equipped with Kalashnikov and when they saw he fled away from the site of occurrence sitting behind the person who was already standing on the motorcycle empty handed."
This fact alone is suggestive of the fact that the deceased was done to death by some unknown person due to enmity/sectarian basis, which also finds corroboration from the mode and manner of occurrence, as well as, number of injuries on the person of deceased.
18. As far as motive is concerned it is always subject to scrutiny by the Court. There is no denial to this fact that bare perusal of the crime report reveals that there was previous criminal litigation between the parties. However , if this aspect is taken into consideration motive mentioned in the crime report could be one of the reasons for false implication and at the same it could be a reason for commission of the occurrence. In a salutary judgment rendered by august Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of Sahib Masih and others v. The State (1982 SCMR 178) following guideline was laid down:- "---S. 8---Motive---A double-edged weapon---Could prompt false implication and revenge in form of aggression--- Mere presence of motive, held, not sufficient in determining intrinsic worth or consistency of the statements of eye- witnesses."
19. All the above narrated facts and circumstances when evaluated on judicial parlance reflect that the prosecution has failed to establish culpability of the appellant in the instant case through reliable, trustworthy and confidence inspiring evidence. It is established principle of law that for extending the benefit of doubt in favour of the accused, so many circumstances are not required, rather one circumstance which creates reasonable dent in the veracity of the prosecution version, can be taken into consideration for the purpose, not as a matter of grace, rather as a matter of right. Respectful reliance in this regard is placed on the ratio decidendi of august Supreme Court of Pakistan in the cases of "Tariq Pervez v. The State" (1995 SCMR 1345 ) "Riaz. Masih alias Mithoo v. The State"
(1995 SCMR 1730 ) and "Muhammad Akram v. The State" (2009 SCMR 230). In the case of "Tariq Pervez v. The State" (1995 SCMR 1345 ), the august Supreme Court of Pakistan has held as under .-- "---Art. 4---Benefit of doubt, grant of---For giving benefit of doubt to an accused it is not necessary that there should be many circumstances creating doubts---If a simple circumstance creates reasonable doubt in a prudent mind about the guilt of accused, then he will be entitled to such benefit not as a matter of grace and concession but as a matter of right".
20. From the facts and circumstances narrated above, we are persuaded to hold that conviction passed by the learned trial court against the appellant in the circumstances is against all canons of law recognized for the safe dispensation of criminal justice. As per dictates of law benefit of every doubt is to be extended in favour of the accused. Moreover , it is golden principle of law that the Court may err in letting off 100 guilty but should not convict one innocent person on the basis of suspicion. Resultantly while setting aside the conviction and sentence recorded by the learned trial court in terms of judgment dated 14.11.2014, Cr1. Appeal No.2053/2014 filed by the appellant is allowed as a consequence whereof he is ordered to be acquitted of the charge and directed to be released forthwith if not required in any other case.
21. Murder Reference No.95/2015 is answered in negative . Death sentence is not confirmed .
22. As far as Cr1 Revision No.444/2015 filed by the petitioner/ complainant seeking enhancement in compensation amount is concerned, as we have disbelieved the prosecution story , therefore, no question for enhancement in sentence arises. Thus, Crl. Revision No.444/2015 accordingly stands dismissed.