' MUHAMMAD MUNIR KHAN, J.--This Criminal Appeal No, 523 of 1981 and the connected Murder Reference No, 175 of 1981 arise from the judgment of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Lahore whereby he on 13-7-1981 convicted Muhammad Afzal alias Achha appellant under section 302, P.P.C. For causing the death of Khurshid Alam on 22-9-1980 at Maghrab-Wela near Sansi Railway Quarters, Lahore and sentenced him to death and a fine of Rs, 7,000 in default whereof six months'
R.I. With the direction that half of the fine when recovered by paid to the heirs of the deceased.
2. The prosecution case is, that Khurshid Alam deceased along with his wife Sharifan Bibi P.W.8, daughters Zohra Bibi P.W.9 and Fehmeeda were living in Quarter No,6, Block No, 510, Sansi Railway Quarters, Lahore. Muhammad Afzal alias Achha appellant was living in the neighbourhood. He started teasing Mst. Zohra Bibi and Fahmeeda, the daughters of the deceased on their way to school and back. Zohra Bibi P.W.9 apprised Khurshid Alam her father of the mischief of the appellant whereupon Khurshid Alam reprimanded the appellant which led to exchange of hot words between them. On this, the appellant became annoyed. As far the main occurrence it has been stated that at about Maghrab-Wela Mst. Sharifan Bibi P.W.8 alongwith Mst. Zohra Bibi P.W.9 and Mst. Fahmeeda were sitting in front of their quarter. They saw the appellant present near the iron edge of Railway. Khurshid Alam after offering Maghreb prayer, while on his way back to his quarter reached near the quarter of Sarwar when the appellant duly armed with Churi raised Lalkara and opened attack on him. Mst. Sharifan Bibi P.W.8, Mst. Zohra Bibi P.W.9 and Mst.
Fahmeeda (not produced) ran towards Khurshid Alam to save him, Before Khurshid Alam could be saved the appellant gave several Churi blows on his person causing his immediate death. The appellant then made good his escape. The alarm raised by the wife and daughters of the deceased attracted people to the spot. Rehmat Khan S.I. Of Police Station Mughalpura, Lahore was on Petrol duty at that day. He reached the spot within half an hour of the occurrence when the dead body was still lying on the spot. Mst. Sharifan Bibi P.W.8 made statement PC/1 to him at 7-40 p.m. It was on the basis of this statement that formal F.I.R. PC/1 was drawn up by Muhammad Rashid A.S.I. P.W.6 at Police Station Mughalpura at 8 p.m. On the same day. The distance between the place of occurrence and the Police Station is seven furlongs. On 23-9-1980 at 2-00 p.m. Doctor Tahir Anis P.W.11 conducted post-mortem examination on the dead body of the deceased. He found the following injuries:- "(1) Stab 2 x .5 c.m. Over upper front right chest.
(2) Stab 3 x .7 c.m. Lower outer left part of chest.
(3) Stab 2.5 x .5 c.m. Left epigrastrium.
(4) Stab 2 x .5 c.m. Right part of abdomen.
(5) Incised wound 2 x .3 c.m. Skin deep back left elbow ' On internal examination there was a cut in the peritonium against injuries Nos. 2 and 3. Front wall of the stomach was found cut against injury No,3 and its greater curvature was found cut against injury No,
2. It contained semi-digested food.
' In the opinion of the Doctor the death was due to shock and haemorrhage resulting from injuries Nos. 1 to 3 which were sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. The time between the injuries and death was a few minutes and between time and post-mortem was 12 to 24 hours.
All the injuries were inflicted by sharp-edged weapon.
3. Rehmat Khan A.S.I. P.W.12 arrested the appellant on the same day at 9-30 p.m. From military barracks. He removed blood-stained shirt P.4 from the person of the appellant and made it into a sealed parcel. .The S.I. Also recovered blood-stained Churi P.3 from the folds of Shalwar of the appellant and sealed it into parcel. The Serologist report Exh. P.L. Shows that the Churl P.3 and shirt P.4 were stained with human blood.
4. The prosecution examined as many as 12 witnesses. Mst. Sharifan Bibi P.W.8 and Mst. Zohra Bibi P.W.9 are the witnesses of motive and the ocular account of the occurrence. They have supported the motive and the main occurrence as detailed in para. No,2 of the judgment. Mst. Zohra Bibi P.W.9 stated that the appellant used to tease her and her sister Fahmeeda on their way to school and back. She complained to her father about the misbehaviour of the appellant. Her father reprimanded the appellant whereupon hot words were exchanged between them. She further stated that on the fateful day it was within her view that the appellant caused the death of her father by inflicting Churi blows on him at Maghrab-Wela near Sansi Railway Quarters. Mst. Sharifan Bibi P.W.8 made almost similar statement. Riaz Shah P.W.7, Muhammad Yousaf P.W.9 and Rehmat Khan S.I. P.W.12 were produced to prove the recovery of blood-stained Churi P.3 and blood-stained shirt P.4. Riaz Shah P.W.7 stated that Churi P.3 and shirt P.4 were not recovered in his presence.
Muhammad Yousaf P.W.10 and Rehmat Khan stated that at the time of his arrest, Churi P.3 was recovered from the Nepha of Shalwar of the appellant and that blood-stained shirt P.4 was removed from his person. The rest of the evidence is of formal nature.
5. When examined under section 342, Cr.P.C. The appellant denied all incriminating circumstances.
He raised plea of false implication. In answer to the question as to why the case against him he stated-- "Prior to the occurrence, somebody used to throw stones in the house of the deceased who accused my brother-in-law Abdul Hamid deceased for it, there was a fight between the deceased and Abdul Hamid in which I sided with the latter and gave a beating to Khurshid Alam deceased.
The complainant had named me in the F.I.R. On account of that enmity and grudge."
' In answer to the question have you anything else to say, he stated; "I am innocent. The occurrence had already taken place when I came back from my day's work of rickshaw-driving at night. When I came to know about my false implication in the case I went to the police station of my own and pleaded my innocence. I was arrested by the S.H.O. In the Police Station".
' In defence he produced two witnesses. Mazhar Hussain D.W.1 is a professional architect. He prepared the site plan Exh. D.I. At the instance of Irshad Qureshi, Advocate and one old woman who had paid the fee for the preparation of the site plan. Farooq Anwar D.W.2 is resident of Sansi Quarters. He stated that he was present outside his Quarter when the occurrence took place. He heard that Khurshid Alam had been murdered. He rushed to the place of occurrence. On reaching the place of occurrence, he found that Khurshid Alam had already expired. Some of the residents of the Railway Quarters were present there. By that time the family members of the deceased had not arrived there. So he went to their house and informed them of the occurrence. Thereafter the widow and two daughters of Khurshid Alam came to the spot.
6. Learned counsel for the appellant contended that the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt inasmuch as the F.I.R. Was not recorded at the Police Station; that the eye-witnesses are related; that their statements suffer from dishonest improvement and material contradictions; that they could not have seen the occurrence while sitting in front of their Quarters and in fact the eye-witnesses were informed of the occurrence by Farooq Anwar D.W.2; and that no one from the neighborhood has been produced to depose about the occurrence. Conversely the learned counsel for the State has supported the judgment of the trial Court.
7. We have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties with care.
We find that in the peculiar circumstance of the case that Rehmat Khan S.I. P.W.12 who was on petrol duty arrived at the place of occurrence before the dead body could be removed from there and that Mst. Sharifan Bibi P.W.8 was already there; the non-recording of the F.I.R. At the Police Station will not make any difference. There is no statutory bar for recording the F.I.R. On the spot in such circumstances. The learned counsel has not been able to shake genuineness of the statement Exh. P.C. There is nothing on record that it was not written at the place and time as it purports. In the F.I.R. The names of the witnesses, name of the accused/appellant, weapon used by him and the manner of occurrence have been mentioned.The F.I.R. Thus being prompt and genuine may be used to corroborate its maker i,e, Mst. Sharifan Bibi P.W.8. The motive stands proved through the direct evidence of Mst. Zohra Bibi P.W.9 to whom the appellant used to tease. Mst.
Sharifan Bibi P.W.8 has not only mentioned the background of the murder in the F.I.R. But has also stated in her statement before the Court. In cross-examination the defence counsel could not shake motive part of the statement of these witnesses. We do not see any reason to disbelieve the statements of Mst. Sharifan Bibi and Mst. Zohra Bibi.
8. Reverting to the ocular evidence, we find that Mst. Sharifan Bibi and Mst. Zohra Bibi are the natural witnesses of the occurrence. Their residential quarter is at a distanee of about 45 yards from the place of occurrence. They stated that they were sitting in front of the quarter outside the door. It is a matter of common experience that in the summer season, the women do sit outside their houses. Their presence near the place of occurrence was therefore, natural and probable as well. The defence version that they were informed of the occurrence by Farooq Anwar D.W. 2 and then they came to the place of occurrence appears to be afterthought, inasmuch as Mst. Sharifan Bibi and Mst. Zohra Bibi were not suggested that they were informed of the occurrence by Farooq Anwar D.W.2. To our mind Mst. Sharifan Bibi and Mst. Zohra Bibi having a probable cause to be present near the place of occurrence are the natural witnesses. When the appellant raised Lalkara and opened the attack they ran towards the place of occurrence and as such had occasion and opportunity to see the occurrence and identify the culprit. The appellant was previously known to them. The occurrence having taken place at Maghrab-Wela there was sufficient light to identify the culprit. We do not see any reason to doubt that Mst. Sharifan and Mst. Zohra had in fact witnessed the occurrence and were in a position to identify the offender. The witnesses have successfully stood the test of cross-examination. The learned counsel has failed to point out any material contradiction, major contradiction and dishonest improvement in their statements. We do not see any inherent infirmity in their evidence. In cross-examination nothing helpful to the defence could be elicited. Mere relationship of the two eye-witnesses with the deceased is no ground to discard their testimony which otherwise is confidence inspiring. This being a case of single accused they could not have substituted the appellant for the real murderer of their husband and father. The number of the injuries and the number of the person named by the eye-witnesses do commensurate. Having appreciated the evidence of the eye-witnesses in the light of the guidelines given by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in case Niaz v. State PLD 1960 SC (Pak) 387, we are convinced that the evidence of the eye-witnesses can be accepted without corroboration and the conviction can be safely sustained on their statements alone. In case prudence still insists on corroboration, the same is also available in the shape of prompt F.I.R. Which can be used to corroborate the statement of Mst. Sharifan Bibi and the immediate recovery of blood-stained Churi P.3 and blood-stained shirt P.4 from the person of the appellant. Muhammad Yousaf P.W.10 had no animous with the appellant. He is resident of the vicinity. The recovery was effected at a distance of three hundred paces from his house. He has no inclination towards the deceased or his family members. Since Riaz Shah P.W.7 admits the execution of the recovery memo. Of Churi P.3 and shirt P.4 and his signatures thereon, therefore, it is very much obvious that he made obliging statement.
The statement made by D.W. 2 Farooq Anwar that Mst. Sharifan Bibi and Mst. Zohra Bibi were not present on the spot and were informed of the murder at their residence by him appears to be an afterthought story inasmuch as the concerned witnesses were not given suggestion that they were informed by this witness. D.W.1 being a paid person, the site plan Exh. D.I. Prepared by him deserves no importance. For all these reasons we are of the view that the contentions raised by the learned counsel and submissions made by him to substantiate the same, are devoid of. Force. The learned trial Court after having applied its conscious mind to the evidence, has properly appreciated the case and has rightly recorded the conviction of the appellant under section 302, P.P.C. This brings us to the question of sentence. We do not see any extenuating circumstances in favour of the appellant for lesser penalty. The sentence awarded to him by the trial Court being legal and proper has to be confirmed.
9. For what has been stated above, there being no merit, the appeal is dismissed and the sentence of death is confirmed.
' The sentence of death is confirmed.