' This appeal is directed against the judgment of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Gujranwala, dated 4th February, 1977 whereby Muhammad Munir, Muhammad Azam and Muhammad Mansha appellants were convicted under section 302/34, P. P. C. And sentenced to imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs, 3,000 or in default in payment of fine to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for one and a half years. The fine, if recovered, was ordered to be paid to the legal heirs of the deceased as compensation. Riasat Ali co-accused was given the benefit of dobut and acquitted of the charge.
2. After the expiry of statutory period as provided under section 426 (1-A) (c), Cr. P. C , the appellant submitted petition for suspension of sentence, which was accepted, on 18th March, 1979 and they were admitted to bail. Thereafter, the appeal was fixed for hearing on 4th July, 1981, 8th July, 1981 and 30th September, 1981 but the learned counsel for the appellants did not turn up. It was specifically ordered, on 30th September, 1981 that the appellants shall make alternate arrangement, in case, their counsel was not available on the next date of hearing. The counsel, however, appeared, on 20th January, 1982 but no time was left to take up this appeal and the appeal was adjourned. Even today, the learned counsel for the appellants did not put in appearance. A request was made by Mr. Nemat Khan, Advocate for adjournment. But in view of the previous conduct of the learned counsel for the appellants as well as for the reason that Courts are blamed for delayed disposal, no further adjournment was possible.
3. Although Mr. Saif-ul-Haq Ziai, Advocate, appeared on behalf of State on three dates, he was not present today. Mr. Tanveer Ahmad Khan, Assistant Advocate-General expressed regrets due to the absence of Mr. Saif-ul-Haq Ziai and showed his willingness to assist the Court. He took me through the entire record. It was a good gesture on the part of Mr. Tanveer Ahmad Khan.
4. Mst. Shareefan Bibi alias Rasheed Begum resident of Warpal Khurd had come to village Badduke Ghusayan in order to meet her brother Naseer Ahmad deceased. On 25th May, 1973 after Juma prayer, she was present in the house of her brother Naseer Ahmad alonwith Mst. Sakeena (wife of the deceased) and Zafar (son of the deceased). The deceased left the house in order to purchase cigarettes. After some time, Mst. Shareefan, Mst. Sakeena and Zafar P. Ws. Heard noise in the lane.
They came out in the lane and saw Riasat Ali acquitted accused holding the deceased. They further saw Mansha, Azam and Munir inflicting toka blows to the deceased. Besides Mst. Shareefan, Mst. Sakeena and Zafar, the occurrence was also witnessed by Manzoor Hussain P. W. (given up as won over). The deceased expired at the spot immediately.
' Three and a half years prior to the occurrence, Naseer Ahmed deceased and others committed the murders of Faiz (father of Mansha appellant) and Hassan Din. The deceased was convicted by the trial Court but acquitted in appeal about a month prior to the occurrence. The appellants had avenged the murder of Faiz and Hassan Din.
5. Mst. Shareefan lodged F. I. R. The same day at 5-45 p. m. At Police Station, Ahmad Nagar, which was recorded by Muhammad Zaman, S. H.
0. (P. W. 10). The S. H.
0. Prepared injury statement and inquest report and sent the dead body for post-mortem examination. He collected blood-stained earth from the spot and sealed it into parcel. He arrested Riasat Ali acquitted accused, on 7th June, 1973. He arrested Azam and Mansha appellants, on 12th June, 1973 who produced blood-stained Tokas P. 3 and P. 4 from their houses, which were taken into possession and sealed into separate parcels. Separate memos. Were prepared about those recoveries. Munir appellant was arrested on 18th July 1973. He produced blood-stained toka, on 23rd June, 1973 and it was sealed into a parcel. The appellants were challaned after investigation.
6. Dr. Zaman Ali conducted post-mortem examination on the dead body of Naseer Ahmad, on 26th May, 1973 at 9-03 a. In. He found six incised wounds on the right side of head, across the right ear, lower jaw below left ear, upper part of neck, front and back of neck. The scalp and skull bones were cut. Vertebrae in the neck were cut through and through. Spinal cord was cut in the neck. The larynx was cut through and through and the blood vessels in the neck were cut. The oesophagus was cut.
' The death was due to haemorrhage and injury to spinal cord. Injuries Nos. 2 to 6 were individually fatal.
7. Zafar Iqbal (P. W. 6), Mst. Shareefan (P. W. 7) and Mst. Sakeena (P. W. 8) gave the eye account of the occurrence. They fully supported the prosecution case. The fourth eye-witness. Namely, Manzoor Hussain was given up as having been won over.
8. The S. H.
0. Proved the receveries of blood-stained Tokas from Azam, Mansha and Munir appellants. The recovery memos. Were attested by Muhammad Hussain and Ghulam Haider, but they were also given up as won over. An application had been made by Mst. Shareefan Bibi complainant that the said witnesses had been won over and the witnesses were accordingly given up.
9. The appellants denied their participation and attributed the case to enmity. Riasat Ali produced documents Exhs. D. B. And D. C. In defence. No evidence was, however, produced in defence.
10. The oecurrende had taken place after Junta prayer. The case was registered at Police Station, at 5-45 p. m. The distance between the spot and the Police Station was fourteen miles. It would show that there was no delay in lodging the F. I. R.
11. The case had been registered on the statement of Mst. Shareefan Bibi alias Rasheed Begum. The deceased was real brother of the complainant Mst. Shareefan Bibi who resided in village Warpal Khurd, which was at a distance of thirty-two miles from the house of the deceased situated in village Badduke Ghasayan. In case, Mst. Shareefan Bibi had not been present in the house of the deceased, the case could not have been registered so promptly. It was a proof of the fact that she was present in the house of her brother. The complainant had given a reasonable explanation of her visit to the house of the deceased. She explained that she had come to the house of her brother, who had been acquitted in appeal about a month before the present occurrence. The deceased first went to the house of his sister Mst. Shareefan Bibi and stayed with her for five/seven days. It was the turn of Mst. Shareefan Bibi to visit her brother in village Baddukey Ghasayan. In view of these circumstances, Mst. Shareefan Bibi could not be considered to be a chance witness.
12. The occurrence had taken place just close to the house of the deceased. Mst. Sakeena (wife of the deceased), Zafar (son of the deceased) and Mst. Shareefan complainant (sister of the deceased) were natural witnesses. All the three eye-witnesses were cross-examined at length and they stood the test of cross-examination. They made consistent statements. No material discrepancy was found in their statements. Their statements could not be rejected on the sole ground of relationship with the deceased. The statements of these witnesses were corroborated by motive and the medical evidence. The appellants admitted their relationship inter se. They further admitted that the deceased alongwith eight others were challaned for the muder of Faiz Ahmad father of Mansh appellant. They had motive to commit the ururder of the deceased. It was a day time occurrence. Hence there could be no mistake about the identity of the appellants. The trial Court was justified in placing reliance on the evidence furnished by these three eye-witnesses.
Manzoor Hussain was given up as having been won over. Some other persons were attracted to the spot, but no one offered evidence. In these circumstances, the statements of the three eye- witnesses could not be discarded.
13. It is true that Muhammad Hussain and Ghulam Haider, who had attested recovery memos in respect of blood-stained tokas, were not examined in Court. They were given up by the prosecution as having been won over, but the recoveries stood proved through the statement of Muhammad Zaman, S. H.
0. Who had no motive to plant false recoveries. The tokas were sent to the Chemical Examiner. The reports of the Chemical Examiner and Serologist proved that the three tokas were stained with human blood. It was another material piece of evidence against the three appellants. Azam and Mansha accused were arrested, on 12th June, 1973. They remained fugitive for seventeen days. It was another piece of evidence against the appellants.
14. After having gone through the record carefully, I hold that the case stood proved against the appellants, and they were rightly convicted Defore parting with the appeal, I cannot help making observation that proper sentence had not been awarded in this case. The three appellants were awarded lesser sentence on flimsy grounds. As many as six injuries had been inflicted to the deceased on the vital part of the body. Five injuries were individually fatal. It was a determined attack on the deceased and the only intention was to commit his murder. The trial Judge invented excuses for imposing lesser sentence.
' For the reasons stated above, the appeal is dismissed. The three appellants, who are on bail, shall be taken into custody and sent to jail for serving out unexpired term of their imprisonment. The appellants shall be entitled to the benefit of section 382-B, Cr. P. C. And the period spent by them in jail as under trial prisoners shall be counted towards their sentence. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.