Pakistan Case Lawโ† Search
1983 P Cr. L J 1996

RIASAT ALI vs THE STATE

Citation1983 P Cr. L J 1996
CourtLahore High Court
Case No.Criminal Appeal No. 654 of 1980
Date1982-09-26
Judge(s)Muhammad Rafique Tarar
ResultOrder accordingly

Riasat Ali (30) son of Ali Muhammad, Rajput resident of village Bhaikot, was tried by the learned Sessions Judge, Lahore, under section 302 of the Pakistan Penal Code on the allegations that on the 22nd of Feb--ruary, 1980 at 6-30 a. m. He committed the murder of his wife Mst. Sughran Bibi in his house situate in village Bhaikot. By judgment dated 12th May, 1980 he was convicted on the said charge and sentenced to imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 5,000 or in default to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for one year. The fine, if recovered, was ordered to be paid to the heirs of the deceased as compensation. The convict has appealed.

2. Muhammad Rafiq complainant and Riasat Ali appellant reside in the same village. The prosecution version is that four years prior to the occurrence Mst. Sughran Bibi, daughter of Muhammad Rafiq complainant, was married to Riasat Ali appellant. He had a suspicion that she was having illicit intimacy with his brother Rafiq and used to beat her off and on. A day prior to the occurrence Mst. Sughran Bibi came to the house of her grandmother who was residing with the complainant and protested about her marriage with the appellant and the cruel treatment meted out to her by him. Muhammad Rafi P. W. Who is married to the sister of the complainant, was instrumental in arranging the marriage of the deceased with the appellant. On the day of occurrence Muhammad Rafiq com--plainant and his brother Muhammad Idrees (given up P. W.) went to the house of Muhammad Rafiq P. W. And taking him with them visited the house of the appellant at 6-30 a. m. They enquired of him as to why he had been maltreating the deceased, on which he stood up and gave a danda blow to her which landed on her left hand. He gave another blow on her head as a result of which she fell down. The complainant and his com--panions caught hold of the appellant and produced him before Nawab and. Inayat, Lambardars, alongwith the danda (Exh. P. 5). They removed Mst. Sughran Bibi to Civil Dispensary, Raiwind, where she expired at 1 I-05 a. m. The same day. Leaving the dead body at the civil dispensary, Muhammad Rafiq complainant started for the police station to lodge the report. On the way he met Ghulam Nabi, A. S. I., at village Mal and reported the occur--rence to him at 12-30 p. m. Vide his statement Exh. P . C. On the basis of which formal F. I. R. (Exh-. P. C. 1) was recorded at the police station at I-30 p. m.

3. After recording the statement of the complainant, the A. S. I. Reached Civil Dispensary, Raiwind.

He prepared injury-statement (Exh. P. H.) and inquest-report (Exh. P. J.) of the dead body of Mst.

Sughran Bibi deceased and despatched it to the mortuary for post-mortem examina--tion.

Thereafter he reached the spot where Nawab Din and Inayat P. Ws. Produced the appellant before him alongwith danda (Exh. P. 5). He arrested the appellant and made the danda into a sealed parcel vide memo. Exh. P. F. He took blood-stained shirt (Exh. P. 6) and Chadar (Exh. P. 7) of the appellant and made them into a sealed parcel vide memo. Exh. P. K. He secured some blood- stained earth from the spot and made it into a sealed parcel vide memo. Exh. P. E. On 22nd February, 1980 at 6-30 p. m. Ghulam Rasul; Sub-Inspector, took over the investigation from the A. S. I. And after completing the same, challaned the accused.

4. On 22nd February, 1980 at 10-40 a. m. Dr. Muhammad Asgbar, Medical Officer, Civil Dispensary, Raiwind, examined the deceased, when alive. She was unconscious and had injuries on the head and abrasions on the back of left hand. Despite best treatment available in the dispensary she expired at 11-05 a. m.

On 23rd February, 1980 at 2 p. m. Dr. Muhammad Naseem Abid per--formed the post-mortem examination on the dead body of Mst. Sughran Bibi deceased and found the following injuries on it :-

(1) Lacerated wound 4 cm x 2 cm x bone deep on the left parietal region.

(2) Lacerated wound 3 cm x 1 cm x bone deep on left occipital area on the. Back to injury No. 1.

(3) Lacerated wound 1-- em x J cm on the left thumb tip.

(4) Multiple abrasions on the left index and middle fingers.

(5) Abrasion 2 cm x 1 cm on mid right shin.

According to the doctor, cause of death was shock and haemorrhage due to extensive fracture of skull which was sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. The probable time between injuries and death was few hours and death and post-mortem examination about 24 hours. All, the injuries were caused by a blunt weapon.

5. In support of its case the prosecution examined two eye-witnesses, namely, Muhammad Rafiq and Muhammad Rafi P. Ws. And it also relied on the recovery of blood-stained danda and blood- stained clothes from the appellant.

6. The appellant pleaded not guilty to the charge. He admitted that Mst. Sughran Btbi was his wife but denied all other allegations and con--tended that he had been falsely implicated due to party faction. No evidence was led in defence.

7. The learned counsel for the appellant is unable to urge anything against the ocular testimony furnished by Muhammad Rafiq complainant and Muhammad Raft P. W. He, however, submits that on the facts available on the record no offence under section 302; P. P. C. Is made out and, at best, the case falls under section 304, Part 11, or section 325 of the Pakistan Penal Code. The learned State counsel is also of the view that offence falls under section 304, Part 11 of the Pakistan Penal Code.

8. Muhammad Rafiq complainant and Muhammad Rafi P. W. Sup--ported the prosecution version of the occurrence as detailed above. The complainant is the father of the deceased while Muhammad Rafi is her Phupha. However, the mere fact that they are related to the deceased, is not at all a sufficient ground to discard their evidence. They are also related to the appellant and there is nothing on the record to suggest that they had any motive, to falsely implicate the appellant in a case involving capital punishment. As already pointed out above, even the learned counsel for the appellant has not been able to point out any infirmity in their evidence I am, therefore, satisfied that the occurrence had taken place in the manner alleged by the prosecution and it was the appellant who caused the death of tile deceased. However, the facts and circumstances of the case indicate that the occurrence happened all of a sudden and the appellant had no intention to cause the death of the deceased. Muhammad Rafi P. W. Stated that when he and his companions reached the house of the accused he was talking to the deceased in a loud tone. The deceased protested to him Muhammad Rafi (P. W.) that he had got her married to an undesira--ble person who maltreated her, upon which the appellant said that he would teach her a lesson for making complaint against him, picked up a danda lying nearby and gave her two blows hitting her hand and head. Muhammad Rafiq complainant also admitted that danda (Exh. P.

5) was lying behind the door near which the accused was sitting. It appears that the appellant got infuriated when the deceased in his very presence told Muhammad Rafi P. W. That he was instrumental in getting her married to an undersirable person. There was no pre-planning on the part of the appellant. Unfortunately, the danda was lying nearby and he suddenly picked it and gave two blows to her, one of which landed on her bead. It is in the statement of the doctor that both the injuries on the head i. e Nos. 1 and 2 could be the result of a solitary blow. In the circumstances. Intention to kill cannot be presumed. However, the appellant can safely be A burdened with the knowledge that a violent blow on the head was likely to cause the death of the deceased. I am, therefore, of the view that the offence committed by him falls under section 304 (Part II) of the Pakistan Penal Code. Accordingly, I alter his conviction from section 302, P. P. C. To section 304 (Part 11), P. P. C. And reduce his sentence to rigorous impri--sonment for seven years.

The fine imposed on him by the trial Court and the sentence in default of payment of the same is, however, maintained. The appeal stands disposed of accordingly.

For educational and research use only โ€” not legal advice. Verify against the official report before relying on it. See our Disclaimer.
DisclaimerยทPrivacyยทTermsยทSearch