ABDULLAH BALOCH, J. The appellant Abdullah son of Shah Muhammad has filed this Criminal Jail Appeal No.50/2021 through Superintendent Central Prison Mach, assailing his conviction and sentence awarded by the learned Sessions Judge/MCTC Killa Saifullah ("the trial Court") vide judgment dated 23rd September 2021 ("the impugned judgment"), whereby he has been convicted under section 302(b), P.P.C. and sentenced to suffer imprisonment for Life with compensation of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lac) to the legal heirs of deceased Bibi Malala as per provisions contained under section 544-A, Cr.P.C. or in default thereof to further suffer S.I. for six months. The appellant has also been convicted under section 337-E(2)(b), Q&D and sentenced to suffer two (02) years' R.I. and pay Daman of Rs.5,000/- to the victim, with the benefit of section 382- B, Cr.P.C.
2. It is the case of prosecution that on 16th December 2020, the complainant Fazal Muhammad Dafedar lodged FIR No.19/2021, at Levies Thana Killa Saifullah, under sections 302, 337-AD, P.P.C., with the averments that on the said date at about .11.30 p.m, levies control received information that a person has killed his wife by means of dagger at Shan Uddin Tube well, situated in Khasnoob, Killa Sail Ullah, thus on the basis of such information the levies officials rushed to the place of incident, encircled the house of appellant and during search they arrested the appellant along with dagger, while found the dead body of deceased Mst. Malala lying in pool of blood in a room, sings of dagger blows were present on her body, while the appellant has also caused dagger blow to his mother namely Bibi Jana. They brought the dead body and injured to hospital for examination.
3. In pursuance of the above FIR, the appellant was investigated and on completion thereof, he was challaned in the trial Court, which indicated the charge and after refuting the same by the appellant, the prosecution examined nine (09) witnesses. The appellant was examined under section 342, Cr.P.C. The appellant neither recorded his statement on oath under section 340(2), Cr.P.C. nor produced any witness in his defense. On conclusion of trial and after hearing the arguments, the appellant was convicted and sentenced as mentioned above in Para No.1, whereafter instant Criminal Jail Appeal has been filed before this Court.
4. Heard the learned counsel and perused the available record. Perusal of record reveals that the prosecution in order to establish the charge has produced direct, circumstantial and medical evidence and also produced the crime weapon i.e. Dagger through which the deceased was Bibi Malala was murdered and Bibi Jana was injured. Undoubtedly, the deceased Bibi Malala was the wife of appellant Abdullah, who was murdered in the house of the appellant. It has been observed that all the witnesses so produced by the prosecution are the close relatives of both the appellant, and the deceased Bibi Malala, thus it is not expected that the close relatives would involve their own blood relation and will let free the real culprits. However, before dilating upon ocular testimony, it would be appropriate to first discuss the medical evidence.
5. It has been observed that soon after getting information, the levies officials reached at the place of occurrence and shifted the deceased Mst. Malala and injured Bibi Jana (PW-2) to District Headquarter Hospital, Killa Saif Ullah. PW-8 Dr. Akhtar Muhammad, Senior Medical Officer, examined the deceased and after examination issued Death Certificate as Ex.P/8-A and MLC Ex.P/8-A-1, perusal whereof transpire that the deceased had received eleven wounds on her head, left shoulder towards chest, armpit, neck, arms, right hand, left shoulder to waist and chest. It has also been transpired that at the time of her murder, the deceased had three months pregnancy.
Suffice to observe here that the unnatural death of deceased Mst Malala has also not been disputed by the defence, but however. pleaded his false implication. Besides, the inquest report prepared by the I.O under section 174, Cr.P.C. also confirms multiple deep wounds on the person of deceased. PW-8 also examined PW-2 Bibi Jana and confirmed that the PW-2 received deep wound on the left side of the back. Thus, the unnatural death of deceased has been confirmed by the prosecution through medical evidence.
6. The prosecution in order to establish the charge has produced the evidence of nine witnesses.
The complainant of the case Fazal Muhammad, Dafedar, appeared as PW-1, who reiterated the contents of fard-e-bayan Ex.P/1-A, wherein he has stated that on the day of occurrence pursuant to information received by the Levies Control Room that a person committed the murder of his wife, the complainant along with other levies officials reached at the house of appellant, encircled the house and arrested the appellant along with crime weapon i.e. Dagger stained with blood and also found the lead body of deceased Bibi Malala in a room of the house lying in the pool of blood, while the mother of appellant PW-2 Bibi Jana was found in injured condition. According to complainant the dagger blows were apparent on the body of the deceased. The statement of complainant has further been corroborated by PW-7 Shan-ud-Din, who is the landlord of appellant and the appellant was his Buzgar. According to PW-7, on the night of occurrence, the appellant made him phone call that he committed the murder of his wife and as such he (PW-7) advised the appellant to remain in his house. Whereafter, he (PW-7) informed the Levies about the occurrence, who reached at the spot and arrested the appellant. Both the witnesses i.e. PW-1 and RW-7 correctly identified the appellant in the trial Court.
7. The first star witness of the prosecution is PW-2 Bibi Jana, who is not only the mother of appellant, but also she sustained dagger injuries in the said incident. PW-2 stated that on the night of occurrence, she along with the appellant, the deceased and other family members including her sister-in-law Bibi Amina after taking dinner were preparing to sleep and the appellant took his wife Bibi Malala towards room, who were being. followed by her (PW-2) and as soon as the appellant and his wife reached in the room, the appellant assaulted Bibi Malala through knife blows, due to which she started shouting and the appellant also hit her (PW-2) through knife. Whereafter, the officials came and arrested his son Abdullah and they also took them to hospital. PW-2 confirmed that the officials also got recovered the crime weapon from her son.
8. The second star witness of the occurrence is PW-3 Bibi Amina, who is the sister-in-law (fw) of appellant and the daughter-in-law of PW-2. She recorded her statement in line to the statement of PW-2 and stated that after taking dinner, the appellant being her brother-in-law (URDU TEXT) took his wife towards room, who were followed by her mother-in-law (PW-2) and after a while she heard shouting and she saw that the appellant hit his wife and mother (PW-2) with knife.
Thereafter, the officials came and arrested the appellant and also recovered the knife from his possession.
9. We have taken into consideration, the statements of both the star witnesses with utmost care and caution and observed that both the witnesses recorded their statements in line with each other. They being the house inmates, their presence in the house at the relevant time is not disputed and natural. The appellant is the son of PW-2, as such, it is also beyond imagination that a mother may falsely implicate her own son in the false case, when naturally a mother is the most selfless person in this world, who starts loving her children even before they come into this world.
Nothing could be compared to a mother's love in this world as it is the purest form of love. Mother is like an angel for her child, who always loves her child and supports him/her. It is the mother who always loves her children without expecting anything from them in return. Thus, in such like situation and keeping in view the love and affection of mother towards her son, it is beyond imagination that a mother (PW-2) can falsely implicate her own son (appellant) in a false case, when more particularly the appellant is the only source of their bread and butter. The statement of PW-2 being mother is most credible and worth credence than any other witness, as she is giving evidence against her own son and more particularly she was also attacked upon by the appellant and under the law the evidence of a injured witness is most credible than any other witness. Since PW-2 herself was injured in the incident, thus according to settled norms of justice, the solitary statement of injured witness being confidence inspiring is sufficient to convict the culprit, as such, legally the statement. of an injured witness cannot be challenged. Reliance in this regard is placed on the case of Farooq Khan v. State, 2008 SCMR 917, wherein it has been held that, "
7... The presence of the injured P.Ws. at the place of occurrence is intrinsic and could not be doubted because it was unchallenged. Statement of P. W.8 is consistent, straightforward and trustworthy with no cogent reason in evidence to disbelieve the same.
8. The defence has also not doubted or challenged the injuries sustained by the injured P.W. in cross-examination. The injuries sustained by P. W.8 have been duly supported by medical evidence furnished by P. W. 10 Dr. Humayun Khan who ruled out that the injuries on person of Namoos Khan P. W.8 were self-inflicting injuries.
9. As to the argument of learned counsel for the appellant that the solitary statement of injured P.
W.8 was the basis of conviction, suffice it to observe that the injured prosecution witness had given the number of injuries caused to the deceased in the incident by attributing the responsibility to the appellant. Evidence of this witness has been supported by medical evidence furnished by Dr. Muhammad Maqsood P. W. 6 who conducted post-mortem examination on the dead body of the deceased Zahir Khan. The evidence of injured witness is worthy of credence, independent and natural and there was no lawful justifiable cause to discard his evidence. The credence 'of statement of solitary witness has already been examined by this Court in a number of cases. In this context reference can be made to Mali v. The State 1969 SCMR .76; Muhammad Ashraf v. The State 1971 SCMR 530, Muhammad Siddique alias Ashraf alias Achhi and 3 others v.
The State 1971 SCMR 659 and Muhammad Mansha v. The State 2001 SCMR 199"
10. The conduct of the appellant has also strengthened the case of prosecution, who despite murder of his wife kept mum and has not lodged report against any one and even has not held responsible to any third person for such brutal murder of his wife, who received more than eleven deep wounds on her persons. Besides, it has also been established through record that at the time of said murder, the appellant was present in his house and the crime weapon was also recovered from his possession. The appellant also not disputed the unnatural death of his wife. All these facts suggest that actually it was the appellant, who has committed the murder of his wife and injured his mother (PW-2). Hence, the direct, circumstantial and medical is fully implicating the appellant with the murder of Mst. Malala and circulation of such information to PW-7 as well as receipt of such information to the Levies Control Room has further Corroborated the direct evidence. Reliance in regard is placed' on the case of Arshad Mehmood v. The State, 2005 SCMR 1524, wherein it has been held that: "We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the evidence produced by the complainant. It may be noted that dead body of deceased was recovered from the house of the petitioner where Mst. Safia was living with him as his wife. Therefore, it is not possible to disbelieve the story of the prosecution."
11. The sole, defence plea taken by the appellant that due to depression, anxiety and being sole bread winner of his own family as well as to that of his brother's family, he had lost his senses.
Though, the appellant denied the accusation of murder, but his plea is giving impression that the crime was committed due to depression and loosing senses. Such plea of the appellant cannot in any manner considered to let him free or exonerate him from the charges, who brutally murdered his wife by inflicting more than eleven dagger blows and even he injured his own mother. Even otherwise, the defence has failed to bring any iota of evidence that the appellant at the time of commission of crime was unsound person. In absence, of any medical evidence, the bald plea of the appellant is not admissible under the law. Admittedly, the appellant in order to save his skin from the consequences has taken such baseless plea, which otherwise cannot be make basis to exonerate him from the charges of brutal murder of his own wife as well as the murder of his unborn baby as the deceased had three months pregnancy as well as assaulting to his mother and we have no hesitation to hold that there are sufficient incriminatory evidence on record establishing the unnatural death of the deceased Mst. Malala and injuring to PW-2. Bibi Jana by the appellant through dagger, which was recovered from his possession soon after the occurrence.
12. The overall reappraisal of the evidence available on record, it is concluded that the prosecution has successfully established the charge of murders of wife and unborn baby and assault against the appellant beyond any shadow of reasonable doubt; that all the witnesses remained firm in their deposition; that they fully supported the prosecution version and the defense has failed to cause any dent in the same; that the trial Court after proper appraisal of evidence available on record has rightly awarded conviction and sentence to the appellant; that the appellant has failed to point out any mala fide on the part of the PWs for his false implication, who otherwise are also his blood relations, that the crime weapon was recovered from the possession of appellant at the time of his arrest; that the appellant has' failed to point out any material contradiction and discrepancy which could benefit the defence version; that there is no error of law, misreading or non-reading of evidence in judgment passed by the trial Court calling for interference by this Court.
For the above reasons, the appeal being devoid of merits is dismissed.