' The appellant Manzoor Hussain son of Ghulam Nabi, aged 24 years, was tried by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Faisalabad, on a charge under section 302, P.P.C. For having committed the murder of Mansha deceased. The learned trial Judge, vide his judgment, dated 20-6-1981, held the appellant guilty of the said charge and sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life and to pay a fine of Rs,5,000 or in default to undergo two years' R.I. It was also directed by the learned trial Judge that the fine, if recovered, half of the same be paid to the heirs of the deceased Mansha.
' Aggrieved by the conviction and the sentence awarded to the appellant, this appeal has been filed and Muhammad Ibrahim, complainant, has also filed a Criminal Revision No, 488 of 1981 praying for the enhancement of the sentence awarded to the appellant from life imprisonment to death. This judgment shall dispose of both the appeal and the revision.
2. The occurrence resulting into the death of Mansha deceased, took place on 20-6-1979 at 7-30 a.m. In the area of Chak No, 144/R.B. At a distance of 10 miles from the Police Station Chak Jhumra.
On the basis of the statement (Exh.P.E.) made by Muhammad Ibrahim (P.W.10) at 10-15 a.m. On the same day, recorded by S.I. Muhammad Ibrahim (P.W.13) at Police Post Aroori, the formal F.I.R.
(Exh.P.F.) was drawn at the Police Station Chak Jhumra by Sales Pervez H.C. (P.W.4). The first informant Muhammad Ibrahim (P.W.10), father of Mansha deceased, stated in the F.I.R. (Exh.P.F.) that at about 7-30 a.m. On the fateful day, he was returning to his Chak alongwith his brother Muhammad Ismail from Chak No, 132, where they had gone to see their ailing sister, and when they reached near Killa No, 3 of Square No, 70, one Muhammad Rafique (P.W.11) also accompanied them after he had urinated. According to the first informant, similarly his son, after having eased himself was proceeding to his house on the Watt of Killa No, 2 of Square No,
70. It was also alleged by the complainant that suddenly, Manzoor Hussain appellant, holding a pistol in his hand emerged from the Chari crop in Killa No, 22 of Square No, 65 and fired at the son of the first informant with the said pistol P.7. The fire was allegedly shot at the back of Mansha deceased which hit him near the neck on the back side as a result of which Mansha deceased fell down. The alarm raised by the first informant attracted Muhammad Sadiq (P.W.12), who was coming from the village side and he also reached the spot. All of them tried to apprehend the appellant but he succeeded to disappear from the scene by showing his pistol. According to the first informant, Mansha deceased died at the spot.
3. The motive for the commission of the crime as narrated by the first informant in the F.I.R. Exh.P.F., was that one and a half years prior to the occurrence, the appellant had cut indecent jokes with the daughter of the first informant, who in retaliation, had abused the appellant. The appellant assaulted the daughter of the first informant, whereupon, Munir Hussain son of the first informant and brother of the deceased had given beating to the appellant. Both sides were proceeded under section 107/151, Cr.P.C. On account of the said grudge, the appellant had killed Mansha, son of the first informant, with .12 bore pistol.
4. On 20-6-1979 at 3-30 p.m. Dr. Iqbal Ahmad Javid (P.W.1) conducted the post-mortem examination on the dead body of the deceased and found the following injuries on his person:-
(1) Seven circular lacerated wounds of fire-arm of entrance on back surface of right side of the chest in upper half portion, each 1/4" x 1/4" into probe passed deep into the chest cavity. The edges of all the wound were inverted, ecchymosed, scorched and blackened. Corresponding holes were seen in the shirt and Bunyan which were also blackened and burnt at the site of this injury and also these were blood-stained.
(2) A circular lacerated fire-arm wound of entrance on back surface of the right side of the neck in upper portion 3" behind the right ear, 1" x 1" into probe passed upto the wound of exit situated on the right side of the neck, in middle portion. The edges of the wound were inverted, scorched and blackened.
(3) A fire-arm wound of exit on the right side of the middle of the neck, 1/2" x 1/4". The edges of the wound were inverted.
(4) A fire-arm wound of exit on the front of the middle of the base of the neck above the sternal bone. The edges of the wound were inverted.
(5) A fire-arm wound of exit on the front of right side of the chest, quite close to the mid-line 4" above the right nipple 1/3" x 1/3". The edges of the wound were everted.
' In the opinion of the doctor, the cause of death was dudden shock and internal haemorrhage, caused due to injury No, 1 which was declared by the Doctor to be sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. According to the medical evidence, all the injuries were caused with fire- arm weapon. Injury No, 1 was found to be blackened and scorched.
5. During the investigation the Investigating Officer, Muhammad Ibrahim (P.W.13) found from the spot empty cartridge (P.6) which was lying near the dead body of the deceased towards its north near Killa No, 22 of Square No, 65, which was taken into possession by the Investigating Officer vide memo. Exh.P.J. The appellant was arrested by the aforesaid Investigating Officer and on the same day, the appellant in custody led to the recovery of a country-made .12 bore pistol P.7 from a Khola situated in Killa No, 22 of Square No,
65. The recovery of the empty P.6 was witnessed by Ghulam Hussain (not produced) and Muhammad Abdullah (P.W.9) in addition, to the Investigating Officer Muhammad Ibrahim (P.W.13). The recovery of .12 bore pistol was also witnessed by the same witnesses.
6. At the trial, the appellant, in his statement recorded under section 342, Cr.P.C. Denied the charges levelled against him and deposed that he had been implicated falsely in this case on account of enmity. The appellant also denied the incident constituting the motive, in this case. The prosecution, on the other hand, relied upon the ocular testimony furnished by Muhammad Ibrahim (P.W.10), father of Mansha deceased, Muhammad Rafique (P.W.11), father-in-law of the deceased, and Muhammad Sadiq (P.W.12), a cousin of the deceased. Muhammad Ismail, another eye- witness, named in the F.I.R. Was not produced. The empty P.6 which was taken into possession from near the dead body was sent alongwith the pistol P.7 to the Director Forensic Science Laboratory, Punjab, Lahore and according to the report (Exh. P.Q.) of the Expert, the empty was found to have been fired from the pistol recovered.
7. To sum up the prosecution relied upon the ocular testimony, the evidence as to the motive, recoveries and the medical evidence, to prove its case.
8. I have carefully gone through the entire record of the case and I find that the prosecution has brought on record convincing evidence as to the guilt of the appellant beyond any shadow of doubt.
9. In support of this appeal, the learned counsel for the appellant has raised the following contentions:-
(a) That the eye-witnesses could not have seen the occurrence.
(b) That the medical evidence is in conflict with the ocular testimony.
(c) That the occurrence had taken place in the early hours in the morning in a field and, therefore, the prosecution could have produced independent evidence and the failure to do so on the part of the prosecution demolishes its case.
10. I have carefully considered all the contentions raised by the learned counsel and I find them devoid of substance. No doubt, that all the eye-witnesses are related to the deceased, but that by itself has never been held to be a basis, to discard the testimony of such witnesses. No enmity worth the name was brought on the record, so as to show that the witnesses had implicated the appellant due to some previous animus. In my view, the motive has also been satisfactorily proved.
The ocular testimony stands amply corroborated by the recovery evidence, i.e, the recovery of the empty P.6 from near the dead body of the deceased and the pistol P.7 at the instance of the appellant. The positive report Exh.P.Q. By the Forensic Science Laboratory Expert is sufficient to establish beyond any doubt, that the said empty P.6 had been fired from the pistol P.7. The presence of all the eye-witnesses cannot be doubted. On the other hand, the empty stomach and empty bladder of the deceased strengthened the prosecution case, that he had gone to the fields in the early hours of the morning to ease himself. It cannot be expected that a real father would let the real culprit responsible for the death of his son to go scot free and to substitute him with another innocent person. The learned trial Judge had awarded lesser penalty to the appellant on account of his youth considering it as a mitigating circumstance.
11. Considering all the aspects of the case, I am of the view that this appeal must fail and the same is hereby dismissed.
12. I have carefully considered the grounds raised in the revision seeking enhancement of the sentence awarded to the appellant. In the light of the circumstances of the case, the learned trial Judge had rightly awarded lesser penalty to the appellant and the same does not warrant any interference by this Court. The Criminal Revision No, 488 of 1981 is also dismissed having no merits.