' M. S. H. QURAISHI, J.-Allah Rakha Masih appellant was found guilty by both the Courts below of having committed the murder of Mst. Parveen aged 14/15 years on 15-10-1975 at about 3-30 p.m. In the area of klhatha Haji Noor Din, Chak No, 214/RB within Peoples' Colony Police Station, Lyallpur, for which he was sentenced by the trial Court to death plus a fine of Rs, 2,0)0 or in default in payment thereof to undergo R.
1. For six months, which sentence was confirmed by the High Court.
2. According to the prosecution, the appellant had attacked the deceased with a chhuri when she was returning to her house from the nearby hand-pump where she had gone to fetch water. Her cries attracted her brother Younis Masih (P. W. 6), Muhammad Waris (P.W. 7), Tufail Masih and Sohan Masih and within their seeing the appellant gave a number of chhuri blows to her cutting her throat. He was overpowered and disarmed at the spot by the witnesses. Younus Masih went and lodged report 4-15 p.m. At the Police Station which was at a mile's distance.. The motive given was that a few days before the occurrence, the deceased had complained to Younis Masih, of the appellant, who was living in the neighbourhood, having teased her, at which Younis Masih had reprimanded him,
3. On arrival at the spot, the police arrested the appellant and recovered blood-stained chhuri (Exh.
P. 5) produced by Sohan Masih. The police also recovered blood-stained kurta (Exh. P. 6) and shalwar (Exh. P. 7) from the person of the appellant. The presence of human blood on the chhuri was confirmed by the Serologist. The shalwar and the shirt were, however, not sent for chemical examination but the prosecution case does not suffer thereby because the presence of blood on the clothes was admitted during the trial by the appellant.
4. Amongst the eye-witnesses, the prosecution examined Younis Masih, the complainant and the brother of the deceased, and Muhammad Waris who being a Muslim is not related to the parties.
Both of them fully supported the prosecution case. The medical evidence also supported the prosecution case inasmuch as it disclosed the presence of as many as eight incised/stab wounds and three abrasions on the person of the deceased. Four of the injuries, including the throat cut, were found sufficient to have caused the death. The appellant did not deny the occurrence. He admitted the recovery of the blood-stained clothes and also recovery of a chhuri though not chhuri (Exh. P. 5) which according to him had been planted against him. His version was that the deceased had been engaged to be married to him, that at the time of the occurrence he had seen her and Muhammad Waris P. W. Kissing each other at which he had got "suddenly provoked", and that on account of that "grave provocation he had inflicted the injuries on the deceased "with the chhuri which I had with me". His plea that he had been engaged to the deceased or that he had seen her and Muhammad Waris P. W. Kissing each other was, however, rejected by both the Courts who accepted the prosecution version and held the appellant guilty.
5. The appellant filed a jail petition for leave to appeal and leave was granted to consider the sentence of the appellant and also the evidence particularly the probability or otherwise of the plea of grave and sudden provocation, the motive and its effect on the sentence, and the reliability of the evidence of Muhammad Waris P. W. Who was directly involved in the defence version.
6. The only material on which learned counsel relied for support of the plea of the appellant's engagement with the deceased was the admission made by Muhammad Waris P. W. That : "I did not know before the occurrence that Parveen deceased was engaged to the accused. After the occurrence, however, there was a rumour that the parents of Parveen had been getting money from the accused with the promise to marry Parveen with him but did not fulfil the same which resulted in the murder of Parveen."
' But this statement, being in the nature of hearsay, is no evidence and thus in the face of denial by Younis Masih of such engagement, the Courts below were justified in holding that this part of the appellants plea was not established. The Courts below were also justified in rejecting the other part of the plea that Muhammad Waris P. W. Had been seen kissing the deceased in broad daylight and in close vicinity of houses. Younis Masih is a natural witness as his house was nearby and within hearing distance from the spot. He was fully supported by Muhammad Waris who cannot be held to be a chance witness inasmuch as he had some 13 acres of land situate near the handpump. He is for all practical purposes an independent witness without any motive for falsely implicating the appellant. In view of the brutality C displayed by the appellant upon the helpless girl, no case is made out for interference. The appeal is, therefore, dismissed.