ZULFIQAR AHMAD KHAN, J.---Appellants Syed Maroof alias Mehtab alias Baba TT son of Sami Ahmed, Muhammad Aftab alias Kaloo Chy Ungli son of Muhammad Suleman, Nadeem All alias Baby son of Yahya and Essa Ali son of Muhammad Idrees through instant appeal have agitated the impugned judgment dated 02.12.2017, passed by the Court of learned IV Additional Sessions Judge, (South Camped at Judicial Complex, Central Prison, Karachi), whereby appellants were convicted and sentenced' for R.I. 10 years with fine of Rs.50,000/- each and in case of default in payment of fine to further suffer for S.I. 3 months, and they were further directed 'to pay Rs.1,00,000/- each as Diyat amount to the legal heirs of the deceased vide Crime No,145/2010, under section 302/34, P.P.C., registered at Police Statio n Pakistan Bazar , Karachi. However , appellants were extended benefit under section 382-B, Cr .P.C.
2. Necessary facts reflected from the instant appeal are that complainant Mst. Shama Parveen wife of deceased Muhammad Akbar dodged FIR on 22.08.2013, which is reproduced as follows:- "I reside along with my husband and children. I am household woman and my husband namely Muhammad Akbar runs business. On 20.08.2013, when he did not come back at home at night hours, I asked my nephew namely Nadeem to enquire my husband, upon which Nadeem made phone call to Akbar who told that he is coming within few moments. Thereafter I slept at home. At 02:30 night, Nadeem again called Akbar to have information through cell No,0345-33474713, but Akbar did not receive his call. After few minutes, Akbar called Nadeem and said that "1 am sitting with my friends and will go to home after few moments," but he did not come back till morning, while at 12:30 a.m., he left message of departing from his business place after short-while. At about 06:30 a.m., I received information through phone that unknown persons have murdered my husband with firing at behind hill at Sir Syed Colony , Sector 14/ 1, near Gate No,5 ljtima Gah, Orangi Town. On receiving such information, I along with my relatives rushed to Abbasi Shaheed Hospital where the dead body of my husband was lying in Mortuary . After completing necessary proceedings, I received dead body of my husband Muhammad Akbar . Now after consultation with my relatives, I have come at PS for lodging report. My complaint is against unknown accused persons who have murdered my husband Muhammad Akbar with firearm on account of unknown reasons. Further , mobile phone and cash were missed from the pocket of my husband, while motorcycle is recovered from the place of occurrence.
I request that action may be taken."
3. After submission of Challan, learned trial Court issued NBWs against absco nder accused persons namely Nadeem Ali alias Baby son of Yahya, Essa Ali son of Muhammad Idrees and Muhammad Aftab alias Kaloo son of Muhammad Suleman. Ultimately , proclamation required under sections 87 and 88, Cr.P.C. was issued against absconding accused through statement vide Exs. 1 and 2. Subsequently , accused Syed Maroof Shah and Muhammad Aftaab alias Kaloo were arrested and produced before the trial Court, and requisite copies in compliance of section 265-C, Cr .P.C. were supplied to them vide Exs. 3 and 4.
4. During the commencement of trial, formal charge was framed against accused Syed Maroof Shah and Muhammad Aftaab alias Kaloo vide Exh:5 to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried and their pleas were recorded vide Exs. 5/A and 5/B respectively . In order to substantiate the charge against accused persons, prosecution has examined PW-1 complainant Mst. Shama Parveen vide Ex:6 and she produced FIR vide Ex:6/A; PW-2 ASI Muhammad Alamgir vide Ex:7, who produced memo of arrest and place of incident on pointation of accused vide Ex:7/A; PW-3 Nadeem vide Ex:8, who produced memo of place of incident vide Ex:8/A and memo of recovery Ex:8/B, PW-4 Muhammad Sultan vide Ex:9 and PW-5 Muhammad Imran vide Ex:10; PW-6 Ali Akbar vide Ex:11 who produced inquest report vide Ex:11/A and memo of dead body vide Ex:11/B; PW-7 PC Sithall Alam vide Ex:12 who produced memo of arrest vide Ex:12/A, PW-8 Muhammad Shamim Akhtar vide Ex:13 who produced Randari certificate vide Ex:13/A; PW-9 ASI Muhammad Siddique vide Ex:14, who produced entry , letter to MLO, certificate of cause of death, entry No,12, statement under section 154, Cr.P.C. and copy of entry No,8 vide Exs:14/A to 14/P respectively .
5. Thereafter accused Nadeem Ali alias Baby and Essa Ali were arrested and required copies in compliance of section 265-C, Cr.P.C. were supplied to them vide Exs: 15 and 16. Amended charge against all four accused was framed vide Exh: 17 but they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried and their pleas were recorded vide Exh: 17/A to 17/D respectively . Prosecution reexamined PW -1 Muhammad Shamim Akhtar PW-2 Nadeem, PW-3 Muhammad Imran, PW-4 Ali Akbar , PW-5, PC Sohail Alam, PW-6 ASI Muhammad Alamgir , PW-7 Inspector Muhammad Ayub Pathan, PW-8 Complainant Mst. Shama Parveen, PW-9 ASI Muhammad Alamgir , PW-10 PC Sohail Alam, PW- 11 Muhammad Sultan, PW-12 Dr. M. Pervez Anwar , PW-13 PC Muhammad Khalid, PW-14.PC Sohail Akhtar and PW -15 SIP Javed Akhtar respectively .
6. Statements of accused were recorded under section 342, Cr.P.C. vide Exs:34 to 37 respectively , whereby they denied all the allegations levelled by the prosecution against them and claimed themselves to be innocent.
However , neither they examined themselves on Oath under section 340(2), Cr.P.C. nor produced any defense witness.
7. Messrs Hashmat Khalid and Syed Abdul Tawab, learned advocates for accused have contended that accused are innocent and have been falsely implicated in case; that FIR was lodged against unknown culprits, while names of accused are not mentioned in FIR nor they have committed the alleged offence; that prosecution has failed to examine any eye-witness of the incident and most of the private witnesses have not identified the accused before the learned trial Court; that complainant is an interested witness and deposed falsely against them, therefore, appellants may be acquitted. in the light of evidence furnished by the prosecution.
8. While controverting the defence subm issions, learned DPG for State contend ed that accused are notorious workers of a political party and involved in so many heinous crimes such like dacoity , murders etc., which are pending before various Courts; that complainant Mst. Shama Parveen appeared twice before learned trial Court: and she has fully supported the prosecution version; that accused were well known to the deceased and her family , therefore, complainant and her brother Sultan have identified them and deposed against them daringly during the course of their evidence; that accused persons were receiving money , from the deceased issuing threats of murder; that it is an admitted fact that due to fear of death, public avoids to lodge report against the criminals of the political party but daringly the same was done by the complainant in present case; that complainant and her brother by maintaining their faith upon the Court, have implicated real culprits for commission of the heinous crime of murder , therefore, considering the special circumstances of the case, impugned conviction awarded by the learned trial Court may be maintained which will encourage the public at large to come forward and depose against the criminals; and that in the prime interest of justice, tranquility and peace in the society , the appeal be dismissed.
9. Complainant Mst. Shama Parveen has vehemently submitted that accused persons have committed murder of her husband due to non-payment of Bhata money though he had already paid huge amount to them time to time but they were demanding more amount; that accused are belonging to a political party and are dangerous criminals; that accused have been issuing life threats to her and her family members since the day of murder of her husband, therefore, she could not nominate them in FIR nor disclosed their names instantly and she remained silent due to fear of life; that she has narrated the truth before the Court by taking serious risk of her life, and prayed for justice.
10. Heard complainant Mst. Shama Parveen in person, learned DPG for State, Messrs Khalid Hashmat and Syed Abdul Tawab advocates for appellants and perused the material available on record. It would be appropriate to have a glance over the evidence of the material witnesses.
11. Complainant Mst. Shama Parveen has deposed that on 20.08.2013, she was available at her house at 06:00 a.m. when her sister namely Naila called her on phone and asked that whether her husband has returned house and she replied her in negative. Then she received another phone call of daughter of her sister , law, who asked her to come to Orangi as some problem had occurred with her husband and she went Orangi, and came to know that her husband has received fire arm injuries and was shifted to Abbasi Shaheed Hospital but he succumbed to his injuries. At the night of the incident on 19.08.2013, her husband was at the house of her brother Muhammad Sultan at Orangi Town, who told her that her husband had received a phone call from a friend who asked him to come at a restaurant. On enquiry of Sultan, her husband told him that he will return soon and left his house at 0030 hours.
One friend of her husband namely Imran had called her husband at 03.00 a.m. and told him that his another friend had come to meet him but her husband replied that he will meet them in the morning. Her brother Sultan was called by some people belonging to a political party at their office and they restrained him from mentioning the names of assailants otherwise another murder will be committed. Accused Nadeem Baby had also restrained her brother Sultan. After departure of her husband at 0030 hours, accused Aftaab alias Kaloo came to the house of her brother Sultan at 1.00 a.m. and told him that he was sent by Akbar and asked him to talk with Akbar on phone but Sultan refused to talk and inquired the purpose for calling Akbar , upon which accused, Aftab alias Kaloo replied that one bottle of wine was available on the first floor of the house which be delivered to him. Sultan handed over that bottle of wine to Aftaab alias Kaloo, and he went away . She claimed that the murder of her husband has been committed by accused persons present in Court namely Baby Nadeem, Mehtab alias Baba TT Aftaab alias Kaloo and Essa Ali. She came to know that at the night of incident these accused persons had taken away her husband on motorcycle in front of the people after having dinner . The dead body was recovered from in front of the house of accused Baby Nadeem, while same empty bottle of liquor and other articles belonging of her deceased husband were also recovered from the house of accused Baby Nadeem. The dead body of her husband was brought at the house of her brother around 12.00 noon on 20.08.2013. She admitted that she has not mentioned the details of these facts in FIR, as narrated by her in Court. She voluntarily said that after four days of the incident, these facts were revealed to her and she had communicated all these facts to the IO, but she didn't know whether IO had documented these facts or not; accused Baby Nadeem, Kaloo, Essa and Aftaab always used to issue life threats to her husband Akbar from the month of Ramzan and they received Rs.60,000/ - as ransom/bhata and further threatened that if her husband will not pay remaining amount, they will commit his murder; accused are notorious criminals of area and they have committed many murders. On the night of incident, all accused present in Court, called her husband Akbar at one hotel and her deceased husband paid Rs.4,000/- as bill of dinner . At about 06:00 a.m. accused Nadeem alias Baby caused four bullet injuries to her husband Akbar over his head and remaining three accused present in Court, were also accompanied with accused Baby Nadeem. After arrest accused Baby Nadeem had also disclosed the details to the police about the murder of her husband. At about 11:00 a.m. when the dead body of her husband was brought at home, all four accused present in Court came at her house and threatened her brother Sultan and directe d him to keep silence and ask his sister/complainant to shut her mouth too. Accused persons used to come every day at her house after the incident and always threaten her and her children to shut their mouths or await dare consequence. She identified accused Syed Maroof Shah alias Mehtab alias Baba TT, Muhammad Aftaab alias Kaloo Chy Ungli, Nadeem Malik alias Baby and Essa Ali to be the same.
She admitted that FIR was lodged by her against unknown accused, while police recorded her statement on very second day after the funeral of her deceased husband. After four days of the incident it came into her knowledge that accused persons present in court, had committed murder of her husband. She admitted that before lodging of FIR, she never approached PS, though accused persons used to issue threats to her husband continuously , and her husband always paid money to them. She denied that accused present in Court did not commit murder of her husband. She denied that due to any previous enmity with the accused, she has deposed falsely .
12. PW Muhammad Sultan, who is also private witness and real brother of complainant, has deposed that on 20.08.2013, he was present at his house and received call from his nephew , who informed him that his brother-in- law Akbar has been murdered, therefore, he went at place of incident, where dead body of deceased Akbar was lying, which was shifted to Abbasi Shaheed Hospital and on the same day accused Baby Nadeem present in court called him and threatened him by saying "to shut your mouth and mouth of your sister (wife of deceased)". He further deposed that one day before the incident accused Aftaab alias Kaloo Chy Ungli, present in Court, came at his house and asked for one bottle of whiskey from him which was given to him by the deceased Akbar . He verified the memo of place of incident as Ex:8/A and properly identified accused Baby Nadeem and Aftaab alias Kaloo present in Court.
13. Inspector Muhammad Ayub Pathan, SIO at PS Pakistan Bazaar has deposed that on 16.01.2014, he received one entry from PS Mehmoodabad regarding arrest of accused Maroof alias Mehtab alias Baba TT, who was arrested in FIRs Nos, 19/2014, 20/2014 and 21/2014, and was also required in FIRs Nos,1 12/2012, 146/2013, 169/2013, 129/2013, 349/2013, 161/201 3 and 94/2014 of Police Station Pakistan Bazaar . He went there and interrogated the accused who voluntarily admitted before him and in presence of other police officials that he along with accused Aftaab alias Kaloo and Essa committed murder of Akbar and he produced such entries before the Court.
14. PW ASI Muhammad Alamgir suppor ted the prosecution version and depose d that on 17.01.2014 accused Maroof Shah, who was required in many cases of PS Pakistan Bazaar , was interrogated in his presence and accused voluntarily admitted his guilt before them, and confessed that he along with accused Nadeem alias Baby , Aftaab alias Kaloo and Essa jointly committed murder of one Akbar , and on pointation of accused memo of place of incident was prepared.
15. PW PC Muhammad. Khalid, posted at Police Station Pakistan Bazar , has deposed that on 19.03.2014 accused Muhammad Aftaab alias Kaloo was confined at PS and accused confessed his involvement in present crime, therefore, accused was arrested in his presence. He identified accused Aftaab alias Kaloo Chy Ungli present in Court to be same.
16. Investigating Officer SIP Javed Akhtar has fully supported the prosecution version and deposed that he received relevant documents 'of present crime for investigation and visited place of incident and secured empties of 9MM pistol from the spot as well as blood stained earth under memo which he produced as Ex:8/A, and also produced two other documents as Ex:32/ A and 32/B. He sent the property in question to the expert for his opinion and he produced examination report; photograph of deceased Akbar along with his CNIC and various entries bearing Nos, 9, 18, 8, 29, 32, 12, 18, 4 22, 30, 25 and 34 as Exs:32/C to 32/S respectively . He identified accused Essa, Nadeem alias Baby , Maroof Shah and Aftaab alias Kaloo Chay Ungli present in the trial Court.
17. PW Dr. M. Pervez Anwar Khan who conducted post-mortem of the deceased- has produced post-mortem report and verified the nature of death and injuries inflicted on the deceased Akbar .
18. It is significant to refer that prosecution has examined 15 witnesses in support of its case, however , some of the private witnesses did not depose against the culprits due to fear and terror of A accused persons, which is reflected from the impugned judgment, as learned trial Court has observed that "It is also matter of record that remaining private witnesses Muhammad Shamim Akhtar , Nadeem, Muhammad Imran and Ali Akbar did not recognize the accused during course of evidence, and it was observed by the undersigned during course of evidence that they were under influence and fear." It was further observed by the learne d Court that "Complainant Mst. Shama Parveen is wife of deceased Akbar and she fully supported the prosecution case and was examined twice by the prosecution. During course of recording her evidence, she was crying and weeping by saying that accused persons present in Court have committed murder of her husband Akbar . She also disclosed role of each accused during recording her evidence." Similarly , perusal of evidence of complainant Mst. Shama Parveen and PW Muhammad Sultan reflects that accused persons were already known to them and they have been issuing threats to the deceased Akbar and his family members of dire consequences and demanding money from the deceased who was paying money but accused persons were demanding more and more money and in case of non-payment, they had issued him life threats to him. Moreover , since the day of commission of murder of Akbar , accused persons have been visiting the house of the complainant continuously and issuing life threats to the entire family and even complainant's brother PW Muhammad Sultan was called at the office of the political party to whom accused persons are belonging, where he was threatened to keep silence and not to nominate the accused persons otherwise accused would commit another murder . It is also worthwhile to refer that during the course of recording the evidence of complainant by the learned trial Court, she was continuously crying and weeping by saying that accused persons present in Court had committed murder of her husband Akbar and she also disclosed role of each accused persons. On the other hand, police officials ASI Muhammad Alamgir , Inspector Muhammad Ayub Pathan, PC Sohail Alam and SIP Javed Akhtar , who have arrested and interrogated, the accused persons as they were involved in many other crimes, have fully supported the prosecution version as accused persons had confessed their guilt before them and disclosed the details of the alleged offence and pointed out place of incident during the course of investigation.
19. Indeed, complainant is a simple household lady and she has no ill will or ulterior motives to depose against the accused persons or to implicate them falsely in the instant heinous crime of murder of her husband. Undoubtedly , complainant has deposed against the culprits in purely natural manner and narrated the vital facts without any addition or improvement and her statem ent has been corroborated by PW Muhammad Sultan, thus her honest testimony could not be discarded mere on the ground that her statement is not validated by any eye-witness. It is well-settled that each case must be adjudged strictly in view of its own specific perspective and circumstances and Court should emphasise on the aspect that whether the evidence adduced by the prosecution is convincing a prudent mind or is based on evil designed object or tainted with any kind of animosity to settle a personal vendetta. Even statement of a single witness is sufficient to convict an offender if it is trustworthy , confidence inspiring and free from any ulterior motive. In the case of Muhammad Ali and others v. The State (1999 SCMR 1957 ), honourable Supreme Court has observed that "solitary statement of a witness when appearing reliable and confidence inspiring is deemed sufficient for bringing home guilt of the accused". In the case case of Muhammad Ismail v. The State (2017 SCMR 713), honourable Supreme Court has observed that "testimony of a solitary witness, which was found to be true and reliable and was also corroborated by some other evidence, could be made basis for conviction on capital charge."
20. It is significant to mention that accus ed are belonging to a political party and notorious criminals involved in many criminal cases, and they were not only extorting money from the deceased Akbar , but also issuing continuous life threats to him and even to other family members after Akbar's murder . Even during the night of incident, PW Sultan delivered a bottle of whisky to accused Aftaab alias Kaloo on the instructions of the deceased who was available with the accused persons. Admittedly , accused persons were visiting the house of complainant regularly after committing murder of her husband and were issuing threats for dire consequences to them. Likewise, on the day of the funeral of the deceased, accused persons had visited the house of the complainant and issued threats to her and her brother PW Sultan to keep silence and not to nominate them, and thereafter they were continuously visiting her house and issuing deadly threats. Similarly , PW Sultan was called at the office the political party to whom accused were belonging where he was threatened not to nominate the culprits otherwise accused would commit another murder . Moreso, a vital aspect of the case could not be ignored by this Court that during the era when instant murder was committed, it was quite impossible for any person to speak against the politically strong criminals or lodge FIR or nominate them before any Court and entire city of Kara chi was made hostage by their terrorist activities. Therefore the objection raised by the defence for not implicating the appellants in FIR, has no worth for consideration in the peculiar and particular circumstances of instant matter and it was natural demeanor and knee-jerk reaction of the complaina nt that in order to ensure safety of herself and her family members to quietly lodged FIR against unknown persons.
21. For the forgoing facts and circumstances I reach to this irresistible conclusion that prosecution has succeeded to prove the charge and bringing home guilt of accused Syed Maroof alias Mehtab alias Baba TT son of Sami Ahmed, Muhammad Aftaab alias Kaloo Chy Ungli son of Muhammad Suleman, Nadeem Malik alias Baby son of Yahya and Essa Ali son of Muhammad Idrees, therefore, instant criminal appeal being devoid of any legal substance stands dismissed.