MAZHARUL HAQ, J.-Zahoor, Feroze, Muhammad Afzal, Muhammad Shakoor (sons of Ahmad Yar), Muhammad Arif, Muhammad Nawaz, Muhammad Anwar, Muhammad Ayub, Ahmad Yar and Ahmad Noon were tried for the offences under sections 1.48, 452, 302, 307 read with section 149, P. P.
C. Zahoor, Afzal, Feroze and Arif were further charged under sec--tions 366, 376 read with section 34, P. P. C. The Additional Sessions Judge, Multan, on 8-10-1979, convicted and sentenced the ten accused as follows :- Zahoor, Feroze, Afzal and Muhammad Arif were convicted under sections 302/34, P. P. C. And each was sentenced to death with a -fine of Rs. 3,000 which was ordered to be paid as compensation to the heirs of the deceased Muhammad Anwar. They were further convicted and sentenced under sections 452/34, P. P. C. To two years' R. I. Under sections 366/34, P. P. C. To seven years' R. I. Under section 376/34, P. P. C. To life imprison--ment alongwith a fine of Rs. 1,000 and under section 325/34, P. P. C. To two years' R. I., each. The remaining six accused were convicted and sentenced under section 148, P. P.C. To one year's R. I., under section 307, P. P. C. Read with section 149, P. P. C. To ten years' R. I. And a fine of Rs. 1,000 each, in default to undergo six months' R. I. Further each. The appeal of the convicts, the connected murder reference and the complainant's revision petition are before us.
2. Mst. Khurshid, an unmarried sister of Zahoor, Feroze, Muhammad Afzal and Muhammad Shakoor accused, developed illicit intimacy with Muhammad Anwar deceased, her neighbour who was distantly related to her. She got pregnant and about one and a half months before the occurrence in this case, she was made to abort the seven months old pregnancy. It became a scandal in the village which was the motive for the crime in this case. According to the prosecution, on the night between 6th/7th September, 1978, Mst. Ghulam Zohra (informant) slept in the courtyard of her house with her husband's sisters P. Ws. Mst. Aziz, Mst. Kaneez, Mst. Manzooran and her mother-in- law Mst. Nooran. At about mid-night her husband Muhammad Anwar (deceased) who was with his father Noor Muhammad and brothers Zafar Iqbal, Munawwar and Ahmad Maqbool, in the nearby cattle-shed came over to the courtyard and asked the informant Mst. Ghulam Zohran to spread a separate charpai for him in the courtyard. After spread--ing the charpai, she massaged her husband who went asleep. Thereafter she went to check the doors of the house carrying a lantern.
As she was about to bolt the door, just then Zahoor, Afzal, Feroze and Arif accused armed with hatchet, spear and sticks appeared and attacked Muhammad Anwar. Mst. Nooran, her three daughters and Mst. Zohran raised alarm. These women intervened, but were beaten up by the accused. They fell down. The accused forcibly took away Mst. Kaneez, Mst. Aziz and Mst. Manzooran to their adjoining house. They raped them naked, cut their hair and raped them. Mst. Zohran tried to stop them. Feroze inflicted a stick blow to her as a result of which she fell down. In the meanwhile Muhammad Anwar succumbed to the injuries. Further, according to the informant, simultaneously a hue and cry was raised in the cattle-shed. She went there and found her f4ther-in-law Noor Muhammad and her husband's brothers Zafar, Munawwar and Maqbool in a pool of blood, who were unconscious. She came back home. The alarm raised by the womenfolk attracted their co- villagers. The injured were carried to the hospital. Accompanied by the village Lambardar, Mst.
Zohran went to the Police Station Tolamba, situated at a distance of, ten miles from the place of occurrence and made report Exh. P. K. K. At 5 a.m. On 7-9-1978 to P. W. 18, Muhammad Afzal, A. S. I.
After registering the case, the A. S. I. Went to the place of occurrence. He prepared the necessary documents and sent the dead body of Muhammad Anwar for its post-mortem examination. He also collected blood-stained earth from underneath the churpai of the deceased. He then visited the room where rape was committed on the three women. He took into posses--sion a pair of scissors (P. 12 and P. 13) vide Memo. Exh. P. Z. Attested by P. W. 9 Haq Nawaz and Malik Zaman Mehdi given up as having been won over) besides the investigating officer. The A. S. I. Also took into possession attorned pieces of clothes such as .a piece of dopatta P. 5 and pieces of shirts P. 6, P. 7, P. 9 and P. 10 and that of shalwar P.
8. These were taken into possession vide Memo. Exh. P. X.
Attested by the same aforesaid witnesses. The A. S. I. Then went to the hospital and was informed by the doctor that Noor Muhammad, Zafar Iqbal, Munawwar Ahmad and Maqbool Ahmad were not fit to make statements. He, however, recorded the statements of Mst. Nooran, Mst. Kaneez and Mst.
Manzooran who were in the hospital. The A. S. I. Then came back to the place of occurrence, be collected the bedding of the deceased through Memo. Exh. P. B. And a bunch of hair (P. 11) from the Kotha of the deceased, vide Memo. Exh. P. Y. These memos. Were also attested by the same aforesaid witnesses.
3. On 7-9-1978 P. W. I Dr. Fateh Khan, Medical Officer, Makhdoompur Pahoran, examined P. Ws.
Munawwar, War Iqbal, Noor Muhammad, Maqboal Hussain, Mst. Manzooran, Mst. Kaneezan, Mst.
Aziz and Mst. Noor Bibi and noted the following injuries on them :-
1. Munawwar Ahmad P. W. 16.
(1) An incised wound 1--'' x --'' x --" on the right side of face --" below the right eye, transverse in direction.
(2)An incised wound 1'' x 1/5'' x --" on the right side of face f below the right eye.
(3) contused wound 2 --'' x --" x --" on left thigh on front 2" from the left knee joint, underlying the bone was broken.
(4) Bruise mark 2'' x --'' on the left of front knee joint.
(5) Bruise mark 5" x 1" on the front of chest on the upper part.
At the tune of examination he was unconscious. Injury No. 3 was grievous and injuries Nos. 1 and 2 were caused by a sharp-edged weapon and the rest with blunt weapon. The injuries were caused within the duration of 12 hours. On 9-9-1978 he was referred to Nishter Hospital for expert treatment.
2. Zafar Iqbal P. W. 15.
(1) Bruise mark 1" x --" on the left wrist joint.
(2) Contused wound --" x --" x 1/8" on the left forearm 2' from the left wrist joint.
(3) Contused wound 1--" x --" x skin deep on the left forearm 6' from the left elbow joint.
(4) Bruise mark 2' x 1' on the left forearm 6' from the left elbow joint.
(5) Bruise mark 2' x 1' on left forearm 2' from the left elbow joint.
(6) Contused wound 1/8" x --" skin deep on left elbow joint.
(7) Incised wound 1--" x --" x --" on chin oblique in direction.
(8) Bruise mark 1--' x --" on lower lip on right side.
(9) Contused wound --" x --" x --" on the front of chest on left side.
(10) Incised wound --" x 1/8" skin deep on the right side of chest on front.
(11) Bruise mark 2' x 1' on left side of neck.
(12) Bruise mark 1' x --" on left shoulder joint.
(13) Bruise mark 2" x 1" left shoulder joint.
(14) Incised wound 2" x --" x --" on forehead oblique in direction 2" from the left eye brew.
(15) Contused wound 2" x --" x -- on head on left side 3' from the left ear.
(16) Bruise mark 3" x 1--" on right thigh on inner aspect 3' from the right knee joint.
(17) Contused wound --" x --" skin deep on right leg 6" from the right ankle joint.
(18) Bruise mark --" x --"on front of right knee joint.
(19) Bruise mark --" x --" on front of right knee joint.
(20) Bruise mark 3" x ---- "on outer aspect of right thigh 2--" from right hip joint.
(21) Bruise mark 3" x 1" on outer aspect of right thigh 3" from the left hip joint.
Injuries 7, 10 and 14 were caused by sharp-edged weapon and the rest with blunt weapon, within the duration of 12 hours. Injury No. 6 was grievous and the rest were simple. On the day of examination he was unfit to make a statement, but on 9-9-1978 the doctor declared him fit to make a statement.
3. Noor Muhammad P. W. 14.
(1) Incised wound 3" x --" x bone deep on forehead 11" from eye-brew line.
(2) Bruise mark 4" x 2" on left arm 4" from the left shoulder joint, underlying bone was broken.
(3) Contused wound 1" x --" x --" on left thigh on outer aspect 7" from left knee joint, underlying bone was broken.
(4) Contused wound 2" x 1" x --" on right leg oblique in direction 6" from the right knee joint, underlying bone was broken.
Injury No. 1 was caused by a sharp-edged weapon and the rest with blunt weapon. Injuries Nos. 2 to 4 were grievous and injury No. 1 was simple. On the day of examination he was also unfit to make a statement. On 9-9-1978 he was referred to the Nishter Hospital for expert treatment.
4. Maqbool Hussain (Not produced).
(1) Incised wound on forehead 1" x --" bone deep oblique in direction 1 F from right eye-brew.
(2) Bruise mark 5" x 1" on the front of chest 11" from right nipple.
(3) Bruise mark 2--" x 1" on right leg 1" from right hip joint.
(4) Incised wound 1" x --" x --" on left arm oblique in direction 2"from the left elbow joint.
Injuries Nos. 1 and 4 were caused with a sharp-edged weapon and the rest with a blunt weapon, within the duration of 12 hours. All injuries were simple. On the day of examination he was unfit to make a statement, but on 9-9-1978 he was declared .Fit to make a statement.
5. Mst. Manzooran P.
W. 13.
(1) Contused wound 1--" x --" x --" on heed from eye-brew.
(2) Contused wound 2" x --" x --" on bead 4--" from right ear.
(3) Bruise mark 3' x 2' on the right elbow joint.
(4) Bruise mark 6' x 4" on the right fore-arm 2--" from the right wrist joint.
(5) Bruise mark 3" x 1" on right wrist joint.
(6) Bruise mark --" x -- "on dorsum of right hand.
(7) Bruise mark 4" x 4" on left arm near left elbow joint.
(8) Contused wound --" x --", skin deep on left leg 6" from left knee joint.
(9) Contused wound --" x --" x -- " on left leg 5--" from left knee joint.
(10) Bruise mark 2" x --"on the front of left knee joint.
(11) Bruise mark 4" x 1' on outer aspect of left thigh.
(12) Bruise mark 3--" x 1" on right thigh on front 6" from right knee joint.
(13) Bruise mark 3" x 1" on right thigh 2--" from right knee joint:
(14) Contused wound --" x --" x --" on right knee joint.
(15) Contused wound --" x --" on right leg on front 4" from the right knee ,joint.
(16) Contused wound --" x --" x --" on right leg on front 4" from the right knee joint.
Her hair had been cut. Injuries were caused within the duration of 12 hours. Injury No. 15 was grievous which resulted in the fracture of the right leg. The rest of the injuries were simple. .
6. Mst. Kaneezan P. W. 11.
(1) Incised wound --" x --" x --" on bead oblique in direction 4" from right eye-brew.
(2) Incised wound 1--" x --" x --"on head oblique in direction 4--" from the left eye-brew.
(3) Incised wound --" x --" on left forearm 4" from the left elbow joint.
(4) Bruise mark 1-- " x --" on left knee joint.
(5) Bruise mark 2" x --" on left leg 1--" from the left knee joint.
(6) Bruise mark 3" x --" on left leg on outer aspect 6" from the left knee joint.
(7) Contused wound --" x --" x --" on left leg 3" from the left ankle joint.
(8) Bruise mark 1--" x --" on left leg on front 3' from the left ankle joint.
(9) Bruise mark 1" x --" on right leg 2--" from the right knee joint.
(10) Contused wound --" x --" x --" on the front of right leg 6" from right knee joint.
Her hair had been cut. Injuries Nos. 1, 2, 3 were caused with a sharp-edged weapon and the rest with blunt weapon, within the duration of 12 hours. Injury No. 10 was grievous and the rest were simple in nature.
7. Mst. Aziz P. W. 12.
(1) Bruise mark 8" x 1' on back on right side on right scapula:
(2) Bruise mark 4" x 1' on back on right side.
(3) Bruise mark 3" x 1--" on left arm near left elbow joint.
(4) Bruise mark 1--" x 1" on right elbow joint.
(5) Bruise mark 3 x --" on left forearm 2--" from the left elbow joint.
All the injuries were simple, caused with a 'blunt weapon, within the duration of 12 hours.
8. Mst. Noor Bibi (given up).
(1) Contused wound 1." x --" x 1" on left leg on front oblique in direc--tion 3" from the left knee joint.
Underlying bone was broken.
(2) Bruise mark 3--" x 1" on the front of right knee joint.
Her hair had been cut. The injuries were caused with a blunt weapon, within the duration of 12 hours. Injury No. 1 was grievous.
4. On. 8-9-1978 P. W. 4, . Dr. Syed Zia-ud-Din Zaidi, Medical Officer, Civil Hospial, Kabirwala, held the autopsy on the dead body of Muhammad Anwar and found the following injuries on it :-
(1) Incised wound on the part of the head on left side obliquely 5" x --" x bone deep, with fracture of the skul underneath 3" from the left ear.
(2) A lacerated wound 2--" behind injury No. 1, measuring 3--" x --" x bone deep, irregular.
(3) Swelling on the left temporal region 2" x 2".
(4) Multiple contusion marks on the front, back of the left upper and forearm in area of 12" x 14" with fracture of the lower end of Numerous bone and ulna bone.
(5) Contusion mark on the outer side of right upper arm 3" x 2' obli--quely with a contused wound on the centre 1" x --" x 1.
(6) Multiple contusion marks on the front of right leg in area of 12" x 5" with fracture of tibia bone (right).
(7) Multiple contusion mark on the front and lateral part of the left leg in area of 10' X 5" with a contused wound on the lower one-third of leg 1" x --" x bone deep with fracture of fabula.
(8) Contusion mark on the front of left thigh 3" x 1" obliquely.
(9) Contusion mark on the front of left knee 2" x 1" with fracture of patella bone.
(10) Three contusion marks on the back of chest crossing each other 8' x 1" each.
There were multiple fractures of the skull under injury No. 1. Membranes were congested and blood clotted in anterior cranial fossa. Stomach con--tained digested food. The small intestine and the bladder was empty. There was faecal matter in the large intestine. In the doctor's opinion, death occurred due to injury No. 1 caused by a sharp-edged weapon resulting in intra cranial haemorrhage. This injury was sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. The probable time that lapsed between injuries and death was an hour and between death and post- mortem was 30 hours.
5. On 9-9-1978, P. W. 18 Muhammad Afzal S. L/S. H. O. Recorded the statements of P. Ws. 7afar, Iqbal and Maqbool Ahmad in the hospital. On 10-9-1978 the S. I. Arrested Zaboora, Afzal and Feroze accused. The same day Zahoora accused in custody got recovered hatchet (P. 14) from his house: It was made into a sealed parcel vide Memo. Exh. P. AA. Attested by the same aforesaid witnesses, namely, P. W. 9 Haq Nawaz and Malik Zamau Mehdi (given up as having been won-over), besides the investigating officer. Afzal accused got recovered a blood-stained handle of a hand-pump (P.
15) which was taken into possession and made into a sealed parcel vide Memo. Exh. P. BB. Attested by the same aforesaid witnesses. Similarly, the same day Feroze accused, while in custody, got recovered a blood-stained stick (P. 16) from his Khola situated near his cattle-shed. It was taken into possession and made into a sealed parcel vide Memo. Exh P. CC. Attested by the same aforesaid witnesses. On the same day, i.e. 10-9-1978, Shakoor, Nawaz, Anwar, Ayub, Ahmad Yar Mochi and Ahmad Noon (accused) were produced before him and they were arrested. Nawaz got recovered a handle of the hand-pump (P. 17), Anwar hatchet (P.21), Ayub a stick (P. 18), Ahmad Yar Mochi a stick (P. 20) and Ahmad Noon a stick (P. 19) which were taken into possession through memos. Exh. P. DD.; P. HH, P. EE. P. GG. And P. FF., respectively, attested by the aforesaid witnesses.
6. On 10-9-1978 P. W. 1, Dr. Fateh Khan, Medical Officer, Makhdoom--pur Pahoran, examined Mst.
Ghulam Zohran (informant) and noted the following injuries on her body:--
(1) Bruise mark 1--" x --" on back on lower part in the centre.
(2) Bruise mark 2" x --" on the left forearm 2" from the left elbow joint.
(3) Bruise mark 2--" x --" on left shoulder joint.
All the injuries were simple, caused with blunt weapon, within the duration of 12 hours.
7. On 11-9-1978 the investigating officer (P. W. 18 Muhammad Afzal) recorded the statements of P.
Ws. Noor Muhammad and Munawwar Ahmad in the Nishtar Hospital, Multan. The same day he got examined Zahoora, Afzal and Feroze accused for sexual fitness and on 12-9-1978 he arrested Arif accused, who, in custody, got recovered a blood-stained handle of the hand-pump (P. 21) from his cattle-shed, which was taken into posses--sion and made into a sealed parcel, vide memo. P. JJ.
Attested by the same aforesaid witnesses. After completing the investigation, the accused were sent up for trial.
8. All accused denied guilt and ascribed the case to enmity. According to Zahoora, Noor Muhammad had a large number of enemies in the village, who might have committed the clime and due to the enmity, he falsety implicated him and his relations. He produced copies of "Rapat Rozenamcha Waqiati" dated 15-7-1977 and 13-6-1978 (Exhs. D. E. & D. F.) respectively, certified copy of a complaint dated 20-7-1977 (Exh. D. G.) in re: Ahmad Yar v. Feroze etc., a photostat copy of F.
1. R.
No. 89 dated 18-5-1974 (Exh. D. H.) of Police Station Siray Siddhu and an uncertified copy of the F.I. R.
Dated 24-:1-1965 (Exh. D. I.) of Police Station Tolamba.
Muhammad Shakoor, who was a police constable, took up the plea of alibi and said that at the time of the occurrence he was on duty at the judicial lock-up Khanewal and he had entered his name in the daily diary register of the police station, which had been summoned and produced in court. Copies Exhs. D. K, D. L. And D. M. Are the extracts from the said register.
No accused produced any evidence in defence.
9. Relying on the evidence of the eye-witnesses, the trial Court came to the conclusion that the prosecution case was satisfactorily proved against the accused.
10. Learned counsel for the appellants contended that in the absence of evidence of conspiracy, those accused who were said to have injured the witnesses in the behak cannot be said to have come together with the other set of the accused who were said to have committed the murder inside the house of Anwar deceased and raped the three women in their adjoining house; there-- fore, under these circumstances there should have been a separate trial of the accused responsible for two incidents. We cannot accept the submission because the offences in this case were committed in the course of the same transaction at one and the same time, though at different places. The motive for the attack in this case was common to all accused. Moreover, the behak of the deceased is only at a distance of one and a half Bigha from his house. It is also noteworthy that the three brothers Zahoor, Feroze and Afzal took part in the incident of murder in the house of the deceased with Muhammad Arif accused whereas their fourth brother Muhammad Shakoor attacked the witnesses alongwith the remaining accused in the behak. According to the prosecution it was Mst. Khurshid the sister of the four brothers laccusod; with whom the deceased was carrying on. Fox these reasons, we find no force in the submission that all accused should not have been jointly tried.
11. In support of its case for the occurrence of murder of Muhammad Anwar and for the rape on the three women, prosecution relied on the testimony of P. W. 10 Mst. Ghulam Zohran wife of the deceased, P.W.11 Mst. Kaneez, P. W. 12 Mst. Aziz and P. W. 13 Mst. Manzooran, sisters of the deceased.
They are the natural witnesses of the occurrence because they lived in the same house with the deceased. Moreover, each one of B them suffered injuries at the hands of Zahoor, Feroze, Muhammad Afzal and Muhammad Arif. Their presence at the spot, therefore, cannot be doubted. P.
W. 10 Mst. Ghulam Zohran fully supported the prosecution case as enumerated by her in the F. I. R.
She is also related to the accused and had identified them at the spot with the help of the lantern which was burning in the courtyard. According to her, after the accused had attacked her husband, she had raised an alarm which attracted her mother---in-law Mst. Nooran and her three sisters-in-law. As they all stepped forward to save Muhammad Anwar (deceased), the accused attacked them all. Thereafter, they dragged P. Ws. Mst. Kaniz, Mst. Aziz and Mst. Manzooran in their adjoining house. Mst. Zohran again tried to intervene but was given a Dang blow on her head by Feroze, accused, which fell her on the ground. It was thereafter, that the accused took away the three women to their adjoining house. P. W. 11 Mst. Kaniz, P. W. 12 Mst. Aziz and P. W. 13 Mst.
Manzooran have fully supported the testimony of Mst. Ghulam Zohran. These three women are unanimous in deposing about the rape committed on them by the accused. According to them, Zaboor and Feroze committed rape on P. W. Kaniz, Arif raped P. W. Mst. Aziz and Afzal ravished Mst.
Manzooran. The four accused also cut their hair and thereafter they left and the three women came into their courtyard. They apprised their mother Mst. Nooran (given up) and their sisters-in- law Mst. Ghulam Zohran (informant) of the rape committed on them.
11. Learned counsel for the appellants contended that the rape story put up by Mst. Kaniz, Mst. Aziz and Mst. Manzooran P, Ws., did not appear to be true inasmuch as that according to the medical evidence, the hymen of each one of them was intact and there was no mark of violence on their private parts. In this context, he referred to the statement of P. W. 3 Lady Dr. Kishawar Saeed who examined these three women for rape on 10-9-1978. In the opinion of the lady doctor, intercourse had not taken place. The lady doctor also admitted under cross-examination that there was no possibility of a partial intercourse either because there was no mark of injury on their private parts.
It may be mentioned here that rape in this case was not for the satisfaction of lust or passion. In fact the intention of each accused was to disgrace the women to avenge the insult to their family because the brother of these three women had been carrying on with the sister of the four accused. As such it may not be a case of such a rape in which passion is involved. We find that the, Chemical Examiner found the three swabs stained with semens. This circumstance would thus suggest that there was some penetration. It is noteworthy that had these three women not been.
Subjected to rape, then they would not put up a false case to disgrace themselves. It may be added here that the prosecution has also relied on the recovery of torn clothes of the victims of rape. Their cut hair were also taken into possession by the police. Each on of them was also injured.
Under these circumstances, absence of injuries on their private parts was per se not enough to say that they had not bee molested. Slight penetration is enough to constitute the offence of rape.
Keeping these circumstances in view, we are satisfied with the prosecution case about the rape story.
12. As to the occurrence which took place in the behak, prosecution has relied on the testimony of P.
W. 14 Noor Muhammad father of Muhammad Anwar (deceased), P. W. 15 Muhammad Iqbal and P.
W. 16 Munawwar Ahmad brothers of the deceased. It is in the evidence of Mst. Ghulam Zohran (informant) that her husband Muhammad Anwar (deceased) was with these four witnesses in the behak and at about 11 p.m. He came back to the courtyard of his house to sleep. She also said that when her husband dozed off to sleep and she was bolting the doors, the accused entered the courtyard with their respective weapons and opened the attack on her husband. Further according to her, when her sisters---in-law were dragged by the accused, she tried to rescue them but was given a dang blow which felled her and she became unconscious. After she gained consciousness, she went near the charpai of her husband who was dying. She then went to the behak from where she had earlier heard the alarm. On reaching there, she saw P. Ws. Noor Muhammad, Zafur Iqbal, Munawwar and Maqbool lying seriously injured. They were all unconscious. She came back and saw that list. Kaniz, Mst. Aziz and Mst. Manzooran P. Ws. Bad come back to the courtyard. She told them that all the male members of their family had been attacked in the behak. This fact is also supported by these three women. The injured witnesses lay unconscious in the behak. They were taken to the hospital and according to the prosecution, they remained unconscious for three days and it was thereafter that their statements were recorded by the police. P. W. 14 Noor Muhammad, P. W. 15 Zafar Iqbal and P. W. 16 Munawwar Ahmad supporting the prosecution case said that Muhammad Anwar deceased) was with them in the behak till about mid-night, after which he left for his house to sleep there. Describing the incident which took place in the behak, P. W. 14 Noor Muhammad said that in order to scare away the mosquitoes they had lit fire in the behak and in the fire light, he identified Shakoor, Nawaz, Anwar, Ayub, Ahmad Yar and Ahmad Noon who entered his behak with their respective weapons and opened the attack. Muhammad Anwar gave a hatchet blow on the head of the witness. Muhammad Nawaz, hit him with the handle of the pump and caused fractures of both his legs and left arm. Muhammad Anwar and Muhammad Shakoor, accused, gave a hatchet blow to his son Munawwar. Zafar Iqbal, was beaten up by Anwar. He was also inflicted dang blows by Ayub, Ahmad Yar and Ahmad Noon. While Shakoor inflicted two hatchet blows to Maqbool, Ayub and Ahmad Yar also inflicted sota blows to him. Out of the three sons who slept with Noor Muhammad at the behak, prosecution produced P. W. 15 Zafar Iqbal and P. W. 16 Munawwer Ahmad. Maqbool, a by of 12 years of age was given up as unnecessary. The two sons of Noor Muhammad fully supported the statement of their father. P. W. Zafar Iqbal ascribed his injuries to Anwar, Ayub, Ahmad Yar and Ahmad Noon. P. W. 16 Munawwer Ahmad said that he was attacked by Nawaz, Anwar and Shakoor with their respective weapons. It may be mentioned here that these three witnesses who were attacked in the behak also said that they heard the alarm coming from the side of their house. It would thu~ follow that the attack was opened by the two sets of the accused at both places simultaneously. No doubt when the injured were taken to the hospital and after examination, P. W. 1 Dr. Fateh Khan said that P. W'. Munawwer was unconscious but the similar observation was not made about the others, although, the witnesses claimed to have remained unconscious for about 3/4 days. We have no reason to disbelieve the eye- witnesses. The mere fact that the doctor did not specifically mention about the unconsciousness of other would not be material because the Sub-Inspector did make queries from the doctor whether Noor Muhammad and Zafar Iqbal P. Ws. Were fit to make statements which he replied in the negative. This indicated that these witnesses were then unconscious in the hospital, therefore,, the incident which took place in the behak was not detailed in the F. I. R. By Mst. Zobran. This shows that the informant did not try to exaggerate.
13. It was next contended that no blood-stained earth was taken into possession from the behak.
We do not think that any adverse inference against the prosecution can be drawn from this fact because the investigating officer frankly admitted that since the main incident of murder had taken E place in the courtyard, he collected blood-stained earth from there only though he did see some blood in the behak. We have no reason to doubt the testimony of the injured witnesses.
14. As to the alibi of Shakoor, accused, he claimed to have signed hi name in the register at the police station by which he wanted to prove his presence there. Admittedly an A. S. I. Also signed the register but he has not been produced in defence. We are, therefore, not satisfied with the alibi evidence, the same was rightly rejected by the trial Court. We are satisfied with the guilt of the accused. Their appeal fails. Appellant's conviction on each count is maintained.
15. On the question of sentence, it was argued that it was a case of the vindication of family honour because according to the prosecution case, Anwar, deceased who was a neighbour of the four appellants developed illicit relations with their sister Mst. Khurshid who became pregnant and when she was quick with the child, she was made to abort about a month before the occurrence in this case. Learned counsel concluded with the submissions that the death sentence should not be confirmed and it be substituted for life imprisonment. Learned State Counsel replied that in this case, the accused were ten in number. They made a wanton attack at mid-night in the house and behak of the deceased. They caused all kinds of injuries to each and every member of the deceased's family. They killed Muhammad Anwar who was then asleep. Thereafter, they raped naked deceased's three sisters, cut their hair and. Raped each one of them. Their barbaric behaviour deserved to be punished with the capital sentence, therefore, the death sentence should be confirmed.
16. We have considered the matter, Undoubtedly, the murder was committed in vindication of family honour which has always been considered as a mitigation for awarding the lesser penalty.
With regard to the other offences that the accused committed in this case they are also punished accordingly. Simply because they committed other offences also in the course of the same transaction in our opinion would not affect the basic principle of awarding a lesser sentence for murder which is committed in vindication of family honour. The death sentence of Zahoor, Afzal, Arif and Feroze is, G therefore,; not confirmed which is substituted for life imprisonment to each. Their sentences under sections 452, 366 and 325, P. P. C. Read with section 34, P. P. E. Are maintained.
Maintaining their con--viction under section 376, P. P. C. Sentence of each is reduced to 10 years' R.
I. But the sentence of fine is maintained. In so far as the remaining accused namely Muhammad Shakoor, Muhammad Nawaz, Muhammad Anwar, Muhammad Ayub, Ahmad Yar and Ahmad Noon are concerned, their conviction and sentence under sections 148 & 307, P. P. C. Is maintained but their sentence under section 307, P. P. C. Is reduced to 7 years' R. I. Their sentence of fine is maintained, in default of payment of fine each to undergo six months' R. I. Further. With the above modifications, this appeal is dismissed.