Faiz Bakhsh son of Allah Ditta (49) resident of Chak No. 500 Malika, Tehsil Shorkot, District Jhang, has been convicted by the learned Sessions Judge, Multan on 4-12-1982 under section 302, P.P.C.
For the murder of Muhammad Hussain (32) deceased on 20-6-1980 at 7.30 a.m. With a Chhuri and sentenced to imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs.1,000 or in default to undergo one year's R.I. The fine, if realized, was ordered to be paid as compensation to the legal heirs of the deceased.
He has filed this appeal.
2. The prosecution case is that about. 2 -- years before the occurrence Ashiq Hussain P.W. 7 was married to Mat. Gullan daughter of the appellant and in exchange he had promised the hand of his sister Mst. Maryam to Muhammad Sharif son of the appellant. When Mst. Maryam attained puberty the appellant asked her hand for his son but the deceased was adament which led to exchange of hot words between them. Two days before the occurrence the appellant had a dispute with the deceased over it and had issued threats to him.
3. On the fateful day Muhammad Hussain deceased was present in his house alongwith his brother Ashiq Hussain P.W. 7 and his were Kist. Sughran P.W.
8. Amir Bakhsh (given up) was also present there. The appellant raised a Lalkara for teaching him a lesson and took out a knife from the Dub of his Shalwar and gave a blow in the abdomen of the deceased. The deceased started running to save his life. The P .Ws, tried to catch hold of the appellant but he fled away. Muhammad Hussain deceased fell injured and died instantaneously. Ashiq Hussain P.W. 7 reported the matter to the police by making a complaint Exh. P.G. To Muhammad Ali A.S.I. P.W. 10 at Chowk Kumharanwala on the same day at 8.00 a.m. Formal F.I.R. Exh. P.G./1 was recorded on the basis of complaint Exh. P.G.
After recording the complaint Muhammad Ali A.S.I. Reached the spot and prepared the injury statement Exh. P.J. And inquest report Exh. P.K. Of Muhammad Hussain deceased. He arrested the appellant 226-1980 and prepared his injury statement Exh. P.L. On the same ay the appellant led to the recovery of blood-stained Chhuri P. 2 from his house through memo. Exh. P.H./1. After completing the investigation he challaned the appellant.
Chhuri P. 2 was sent for chemical examination and according to serologist's report Exh. P.N. It was found to be stained with human blood.
4. Dr. Riaz-ud-Din P.W. 5 conducted autopsy on the dead body of Muhammad Hussain deceased on 21-6-1980 and found the following injuries thereon:- (1)A stab wound on the upper part of right abdomen 5 c.m. x 1 -- c.m. x abdominal cavity, about 16 c.m. Below the right nipple and 12 c.m. From the mid-line.
(2)An incised wound on the back of right thigh 2 -- c.m. x 1 c.m. x muscle deep, about 17 c.m., above the knee joint.
The injuries were ante-mortem caused by sharp-edged weapon. Injury No. 1 was sufficient to cause death while injury No. 2 was simple in nature. The death occurred due to shock and internal abdominal haemorrhage due to injury No. 1. The time between injuries and death was immediate and that between death and post-mortem about 24 hours. The stomach contained watery fluid which was stained with blood. Exh. P.F. Is the post-mortem report while Exh. P.F./1 is the diagram of the injuries.
5. Dr. Imtiaz Ahmad Khan C.W. 1 examined the appellant or 23-6-1980 and found the following injuries thereunder:- (1)A lacerated wound on anterior of proximal phalange of right index finger 2 c.m. x 1/4 c.m. x muscle deep.
(2)An abrasion on the anterior of left palm 1 c.m. x 1/10 c.m.
(3)A lacerated wound on anterior of left palm in the middle -- c.m. x 1/5 c.m. x subcutaneous tissue deep.
(4)An incised wound on medial side of left thigh 1 -- c.m. x -- c.m. x muscle deep.
The injuries were simple in nature.
Injury No. 4 was caused by sharp-edged weapon while the rest by blunt weapon. The injured was complaining of pain in the head, chest, abdomen and left lower limb. The duration of the injuries was 3-5 days. Exh. P.D. Is medico-legal report.
6. The appellant pleaded not guilty to the charge and denied the prosecution allegations. He admitted that his daughter Mst. Gullan was married to Ashiq Hussain and in Watts his sister Mst.
Maryam had been given in Nikah to his son Sharif. Explaining his involvement in the case he made the, following statement:- "My daughter Gullan was married to Ashiq Hussain complainant 2 -- years before the occurrence.
Later on my daughter Mst. Jannat was also married to Muhammad Hussain deceased. When Mst.
Maryam came up of age I started insisting that her marriage be performed with my son. I was being put of on 'he plea of financial stringencies. Lastly, I went to the house of the deceased and stayed there for the night and insisted for the marriage of Mst. Maryam. Muhammad Hussain told me to make a reply in the morning. When in the morning we got up and I insisted and so did my daughter Mst. Jannat for the marriage of Mst. Maryam but the deceased refused. On this Mst.
Jannat told her husband, i.e. The deceased that she would be going with me and I also wanted to take her away. This created dispute between us. I got up and asked my daughter to go with me and we started. The deceased picked up a Sota and started giving me blows in the courtyard. I snatched the same and threw it away. I again started with my daughter. On this the deceased picked up a knife and gave me a blow and on this I and my daughter came out in the street. The deceased again reached us armed with a knife; he caught hold of the pigtail of my daughter from left hand and with the knife in right hand tried to give me a blow which I snatched and gave him the blow in self-defence. He fell down and I and my daughter went to our house which was at a distance of 2-3 squares away. When later on the police reached the spot I reached there and surrendered myself."
7. At the trial, Ashiq Hussain P.W. 7 and Mst. Sughran P.W. 8 appeared as eye-witnesses. Amir Bakhsh was given up as unnecessary. Muhammad Shahid Khan P.W.9 and Muhammad Ali, A.S.I.
P.W.10 proved the recovery of Chhuri P. 2 at the instance of the appellant from his house.
8. The trial Court relying on the ocular testimony, the recovery of Chhuri P. 2 at the instance of the appellant and the motive, convicted and sentenced the appellant as stated above.
9. Criticising the judgment, learned counsel has stated that the prosecution evidence is unreliable, the defence version has not been properly appreciated and further that the prosecution story itself Corroborates the defence version. Since the occurrence has been admitted the appellant the only question that falls for determination is as to whether the occurrence had taken place in the manner as alleged by the prosecution or in the manner as stated by the appellant. Ashiq Hussain P.W. 7 son-in-law of the appellant admitted that Nikah of his sister Mst. Maryam had been performed with Sharif son of the appellant. The appellant was medically examined and four injuries were found on his person caused with sharp-edged weapon and blunt weapon. The duration of his injuries was the same as that of the deceased. The prosecution has not at all explained these injuries. The suppression of A this fact makes the ocular testimony highly doubtful. Initially, the prosecution case was that the appellant had caused one Chhuri blow in the abdomen of the deceased but at the trial they challenged their version stating that the appellant had given further blows on the back of his right thigh. According to them the second blow was also given to him when be was still in the courtyard and it was from this place that the deceased had run for about 20/25 yards before he fell down. Dr. Riaz Uddin P.W. 5 who conducted autopsy on the dead body of B the deceased contradicts the eye-witnesses by stating that after the receipt of injury No. 1 the deceased could not have walked for more than 2/3 paces. Ashiq Hussain P.W. 7 is brother of the deceased while Mst. Sughran P.W. 8 is widow of the deceased. Mir Bakhsh P.W. Who is also said to have witnessed the occurrence, has not been produced by the prosecution. The appellant's daughter Mst. Gullan was married to Ashiq Hussain P.W.
7. For this reason, he could have gone to the house of the deceased without any let or hinderance. The plea of the appellant if placed in juxtaposition to the prosecution version appears to be reasonably possible. Unexplained injuries found on the person of the appellant give weight to the plea raised by him. In all probability, it appears that the appellant had gone to the house of the deceased for asking the hand of his sister for his son and on account of his unfavourable attitude a physical altercation took place between them. The appellant who was given four injuries with blunt and sharp-edged weapons was justified to act in self-defence by inflicting two injure on the person of the deceased, one of which proved fatal.