A. R. Sheikh, J.--This judgment will dispose of two connected criminal appeals (being Criminal Appeals Nos. 722 and 723 of 1967) by Ahmad Bakhsh (son) and Jiwan (father) respectively. The appellants stood trial for the murder of Mst. Bhagan (wife of Ahmad Bakhsh appellant) and the Additional Sessions Judge by his order dated the 21st of August 1967 has convicted Ahmad Bakhsh under section 302 while Jiwan has been convicted under section 302 read with section 109 of the Pakistan Penal Code, and both of them have been sentenced to transportation for life.
2. The occurrence is staled to have taken place on the 17th of July 1966 at 8-30 p.m. in the house of the appellants in Cliak No. 14/9-R Police Station Tolamba, Tehsil Khanewal, district Multan. Nusrat (P.
W. 9) started for the police station, situate at a distance of 13 miles to lodge the report but he met Salabat Khan A. S. I. (P. W. 13) on the way, in the area of Chak No. 19/9-R some live or six miles away from the place of occurrence, and made his statement Exh. P. A. to him at 6 a.m. on the 18th of July 1966. The formal F. I. R. Exh. P. A./l was recorded by Muhammad Raliq, Head Constable (P. W. 3) at 8- 15 a.m. on the 18th of July 1966. The appellant Ahmad Bakhsh was arrested on the 29th of July 1966 from Chak No. 38/9-R, at a distance of about seven or eight miles from the Chak of the appellants.
According to the facts disclosed in the first information report Ahmad Bakhsh appellant was employed in the Department of Maleria Eradication, and in his absence Mst. Bhagan, his wife, had developed illicit connections with Manzur (P. W. 6) which liaison was resented by Jiwan appellant.
On the fateful day, Ahmad Bakhsh had come back from his duty and the P. Ws. namely Ibrahim (P.
W. 8), Nusrat (P. W. 9) and Abdur Rahman (P. W. 12) while passing by the house of the appellants heard exhortation by Jiwan to Ahmad Bakhsh to finish the victim and then they heard shriek of Mst.
Bhagan, they entered the courtyard and saw Jiwan standing in the passage while Ahmad Bakhsh was inflicting knife blows on Mst. Bhagan in the kotha where she had been felled on the ground. The witnesses attempted to intervene but they were threatened with dire consequences and then Ahmad Bakhsh ran away with the weapon of offence, the knife Exh. P. 9.
3. The post-mortem examination report Exh. P. J. showed the following seven incised injuries on the dead body :--
(1) An incised wound 1' x J" penetrating into the chest with the cutting of fourth cartilage over the right side of the chest 1" from the sternum and 3" from the right nipple.
(2) An incised wound, x['x J", over the right side of breast, * from the nipple.
(3) An incised wound, 2" x Y opening inlo the chest over the right side of the chest 3" from the nipple and 6" below the cxilla with the fourth rib cut.
(4) An incised wound, 1" x Y x J" over the right side of the abdomen, 5" above the umbillicus and half inch below the costal margin.
(5) An incised wound, 1" x Y x over the right side of the abdomen, 3" on the right of injury No. 4.
(6) An incised wound, |''x-i"xl/6" over the middle of the upper margin of the right hip bone.
(7) An incised wound, l"x "x skin deep over the right side of the buttock and Y below injury No. 6.
Injuries Nos. 1 and 3 were stated to be grievous and sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. The rest were simple.
4. At trial Ibrahim (P. W. 8), Nusrat (P. W. 9) and Abdur Rehman (P. W. 12) reiterated the story given in the first infor mation report. Their statements are highly discrepant and their dramatic appearance on the scene is greatly unconvincing. We have been taken through the record and we find that these P. Ws. are mere chance witnesses and much reliance cannot be placed on their testimony.
We further find that the occurrence having taken place at 8-30 p.m. these alleged eye-witnesses have delayed lodging of the report with the police for almost twelve hours for which there is no explanation.
5. The other factor relied on in the case is that of recoveries. Exh. P. 8 is the chaddar of Ahmad Bakhsh appellant recovered from his person on the 20th of July 1966 as per recovery memo. Exh. P.
F. witnessed by Fazal Haq (P. W. 7), Abdul Hamid Ghauri, S. H. O. (P. W. 11) and one Sarfraz not produced at trial. The weapon of offence, Exh. P. 9 is stated tb have been recovered as per recovery memo. Exh. P. G. Again this recovery is witnessed by Fazal Haq (P. W. 7) and the said Sarfraz. The recovery is stated to have been made at the instance of appellant Ahmad Bakhsh from underneath a bush in the area of Chak No. 13/9-R near Makhdumpur Railway Station. The chaddar Exh. P, 8 and the knife Exh. P. 9 were sent for chemical exami nation and they have been held to be stained with human blood as per chemical examiner's report Exh. P. M. and scrologist's report Exh. P.
N.
6. The recovery witnesses are stated by the Investigating Officer Abdul Hamid Ghauri S.H.O. (P.W. 11) to have been taken by the said witness with him from Chak No. 14/9-R to Chak No. 38/9-R a distance 5 or 6 miles away, when he arrested the accused and then recovered the chaddar Exh. P.
8. Therefrom he travelled some 10/12 miles along with these witnesses to Makhdumpur Railway Station when Ahmad Bakhsh appellant led to the recovery of the knife Exh. P. 9 from under a bush.
Sarfraz one of the witnesses has not been produced. No respectable witness of the Ilaqa is associated with the recovery. This Court has strongly deprecated the practice of not associating independent respectables of the locality from where the recovery is to be made and it has further viewed with concern the non-production of independent witnesses at trial. In view of our estimate of the ocular witnesses, these recoveries are of no avail against the appellants.
7. The motive question has been pressed into service by the learned Additional Sessions Judge to lay the blame at the door of Ahmad Bakhsh and Jiwan appellants that both of them were interested in removing Mst. Baghan from the land of the living but this factor again has not been proved beyond doubt. The young husband might have been interested in saving his honour but the old man has been roped in merely on the basis of alleged exhortation of which there is no convincing proof. The suggestion in the cross-examination of the P. Ws. that Manzur (P. W, 6) the paramour of Mst. Baghan was surprised by Ahmad Bakhsh appellant when he came back from duty is not sufficient to condemn the appellants who have otherwise not been shown to have been connected with the murder, which patently was a blind murder and had not been witnessed by any one of the alleged eye-witnesses.
8. The prosecution lias failed to convincingly establish the connection of the two appellants with the murder and giving them the benefit of doubt we set aside the conviction and the sentence. The appeal is allowed and the appellants will be released forth with, if they are not required in any other case. .