1. SALAHUDDIN AHMED, J.-These two appeals by special leave of this Court are from the order of the Lahore High Court, dismissing the appellants' appeal from their conviction and sentences under section 302/149 of the Pakistan Penal Code on two counts of murder and under sections 148 and 324/149, P. P. C. Appeal No. 20 of 1972 is by five convicts while Jail Appeal No. 21 of 1972 is by four convicts only as Nazir son of Sadique did not join in the Jail Appeal.
2. The motive for the crimes was that four years before the occurrence appellant Sadiq was beaten by A.I Ahmad deceased, who was prosecuted for the same but was acquitted.
3. The occurrence took place after khuftan on the night between 4/5th August 1966. It was a moon-lit night. P. W. 14, Mian Khan went to the `Behk' of his cousins A.I Ahmad and Akbar (both deceased) to borrow bullocks from them for ploughing his land. Sometime after he had sat with them and started smoking, all the five appellants armed with spears, emerged from a Bajra field situated towards the south of the `Behk' and gave a `lalkara'. P. W. Mian Khan and his two cousins ran in the north-western direction towards the Rajbah hotly chased by the appellants. A.I Ahmad had picked up a stick before he had started running. A Ghandal (watered field) in front arrested their progress and they had to turn back, and found themselves confronted with the appellants. Appellant Sadiq opened the attack and gave a spear blow in the abdomen of Akbar (deceased). Appellant Ahmad also gave a blow in Akbar's abdomen, and Akbar fell down. Appellant Nazir struck with a spear on the left arm of P. W. Mian Khan. A.I Ahmad (deceased) struck with his stick appellant Sadiq.
4. Appellant Shera gave a spear blow on the abdomen of A.I Ahmad (deceased). Appellant Rahman struck with spear on the right eye of A.I Ahmad deceased and the latter fell down on the ground and appellant Nazir struck him with a spear. Appellants Sadeque and Ahmad gave one blow each to Akbar (deceased) while he was lying on the ground. At the alarm raised by the victims P. Ws.
5. Mohammad Hayat, Ghulam Mohammad and Ghulam Mohammad Cheema (P. Ws. 15, 16 and 17 respectively) arrived at the spot from their `Behk' close by and witnessed the occurrence. The assailants then ran away. Ahmad died at the spot and Akbar died while being carried on a cot to his `Behk'. P. W. Mian Khan having left the two bodies in the care of P. Ws. Ghulam Mohammad Cheema and Khushi Mohammad, went to Police Station Pahrianwali situated at a distance of 10 -- miles away, and lodged the First Information Report at 5 a.m. On 5-8-1966. The report was recorded by P. W. 18, Sub-Inspector Muzaff'ar Hussain. The Sub-Inspector visited the place of occurrence and started preliminary investiga--tions in course of which he seized a stick, which lay near the body of A.I Ahmad deceased. The officer also seized blood--stained earth which lay underneath the two bodies. Appellants Shera, Ahmad, Rahman and Nazir were presented by Ghulam Qadir before the Sub-Inspector on 10-8-1966 and the said appellants were arrested. Each one of these four appellants led to the recovery of a blood-stained spear from his house, and the spears were duly seized and exhibited. On 18-8-1966 appellant Sadeque was presented by Ghulam Qadir, and the appellant was arrested. Sadeque also led to the recovery of a blood-stained spear from a sugarcane field and it was seized. Subsequently, the Chemical Examiner and the Serologist found all the seized spears to contain human blood.
6. The medical evidence disclosed the following injuries on the two deceased, Akbar and A.I Ahmad On Akbar:
(i) A stab wound 3" x 1" on the left side of chest from 1" below mid clavicular point, deep into chest cavity. Lung tissue was protruding out through wound. Upper and middle lobes left lung were punctured. The chest cavity was full of blood. The wound margins were deep tissues were stained with blood.
(ii) A stab wound 2-- " x 1" deep into abdominal cavity on the right side 5" above the umbilicus.
7. Intestines were protruding -, out through the wound. Measantry and the stomach were ' punctured.
8. Semi-digested material was found in abdominal cavity. The wound margins were stained with blood.
(iii) An incised wound 6" x 3" x bone deep on the left upper arm inner and front middle part oblique in diacular all the,; muscles and vessels were cut. The wound margins were stained with blood.
(iv) A stab wound 1" x 1/4" x 1" on left lumbar region middle. The wound margins were stained with blood.
9. On A.I Ahmad
(i) A stab wound cutting the eye-lids deep into eye. All the; structure of the eye are punctured. Eye is full of clotted blood. Eye is distorted.
(ii) A stab wound 1-- "x 1" deep into chest cavity on left side ' front chest on left chest 5" above left nipple.
(iii) An incised wound 1" x 1/4" X 1/4" in between left thumb and left hand's finger.
10. Injuries Nos. 1, 2 and 3 on Akbar deceased were found sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. Injuries Nos. 1, 2 and 4 were found to have been caused by a sharp. Edged pointed weapon and injury No. 3 by a sharp-edged weapon. Injury No. 2 on A.I Ahmad deceased was found sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. Injuries Nos. 1 and 2 were caused by sharp-pointed weapon and Injury No. 3 by sharp-edged weapon.
11. P. W. Mian Khan was medically examined on 5th August 1966 at 6-15 a.m. And a penetrating wound 1-5/8' x 3/4" x 2j" obliquely going upward on the back of left forearm 4 above the left wrist joint was found on him. In the opinion of the Doctor the injury was simple in nature and caused by a sharp.: pointed weapon. The probable duration of the injury was about 6-12 hours. On the 18th August 1966 at 5-35 a.m. Appellant Mohammad Sadeque was examined by the same doctor who, had examined P. W. Mian Khan and the following injuries were found on Mohammad Sadeque .
(i) An abrasion 1-- " x 1/4" below the left knee joint.
(ii) An abrasion 1/2" x 1/8" on the medial side of right lower leg 2-- " x 2" on the back and medial side of the left forearm 4-- " above the wrist joint.
12. Injuries Nos. 1 and 2 were simple in nature while injury No. 3 was found to be grievous due to fracture of bone. All the injuries were caused by blunt weapon and their,,, duration wag about 1 to 2 weeks.
13. The appellants simply denied their guilt ands said that their had been involved due to enmity. They also denied the recovery of the weapons at their instance. They did not examine any witness in defence.
14. Appellant Shera, Ahmad and Sadeque are brothers while appellant Rahman is their paternal cousin. Wife of Shera and Nazir appellants are sisters. The prosecution case rests upon ocular evidence as corroborated by the evidence of recovery of a blood-stained spear at the instance of each one of the appellants. The four eye-witnesses are P. W. 14, Mian Khan, P. W. 15, Mohammad Hayat, P. W. 16, Ghulam Mohammad son of Shah Mohammad and P. W. 17, Ghulam Mohammad Cheema. The last named witness went back on his earlier statement and he was accordingly declared hostile and cross-examined by the prosecution. His evidence has not been relied on by the two Courts and is therefore, not relevant for our purpose. The prosecution is thus left with only three witnesses who are admittedly related to the two deceased, A.I Ahmad and Akbar who were brothers. Their evidence have been considered by the learned judges of the High Court and found to be consistent and free from any real discrepancy. They were the natural witnesses as one of them, namely, P. W. Mian Khan was the person who went to the deceased to borrow bullocks, and the other two witnesses had their `Behk' close by. There was no allegation of any enmity between these three witnesses and the appellants and, therefore, they had no reason to falsely implicate the appellants. P. W. Mian Khan was himself a victim of the occurrence and therefore, his presence at the spot could not be doubted.
15. The learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the appellants has contended that P. W. Mian Khan had falsely introduced `Ghandal' (watered field), and therefore, his evidence should not have been relied on. The learned Advocate has argued that the Patwari who prepared the site plan admittedly made no mention of any Ghandal on the site plan. It may be stated that all the three eye- witnesses have consistently mentioned the existence of Ghandal, and their evidence on this point have remained un--challenged. All that the Patwari P. W. 8 Abdul Rahman said in his cross- examination was : "I have not shown any Ghandal (watered land), in the site plans mentioned above."
16. No question was put to the Investigating Officer in regard to the existence of the Ghandal on behalf of the defence. We, therefore, do not think that there was any reason whatsoever to disbelieve the evidence of the said three eye-witnesses.
17. The evidence of all the three eye-witnesses have received further support from the medical evidence, and in spite of various contentions raised on behalf of the appellants we do not fin any inconsistency between the medical evidence and the evidence of the eye-witnesses. The learned Judges of the High Court have rightly observed that so far as the actual site of the injuries is concerned, the witnesses have only given general description of the body of the deceased where they saw the blow struck during the attack which took place at night.
18. We do not find any substance in the contention that the injuries could not be caused by a spear or by spears only. The learned Judges of the High Court have fully discussed this aspect of the question and we are in full agreement with them.
19. The ocular evidence has received further support from the, evidence of recoveries of spears from the four appellants Shera Nazir, Ahmad and Rahman. The recovery of these spears has been satisfactorily proved by the Investigating Officer P. W. 18 and an independent witness P. W.
20. Mohammad Hussain. The recovery of the spear from Sadeque has not been relied upon by the High Court because of certain discrepancies in the evidence of P. W. 12, Khushi Mohammad. This has, however, not affected the evidence of the eye-witnesses implicating all the appellants including appellant Sadeque. The witnesses having been found to be related to the deceased and thus interested it was prudent to require some amount of corroboration as a safeguard and guarantee that the witnesses have spoken the truth. It has been argued that the corroboration in the present case must also relate to the identity of appellant Sadeque and in the absence of such corroboration the ocular evidence should not have been relied on for the purpose of his conviction.
21. We are unable to accept this view for only in the case of an accomplice whose evidence is considered to be tainted in the eye of law such corroboration is necessary. All that is required in the present case is that there must be some guarantee to assure the Court that the witnesses are truthful and their evidence can be safely relied upon for the purpose of conviction of an accused person. The relationship of Sadeque with appellants Shera, Ahmad and Rahman together with the motive for the offence which the prosecution succeeded in proving afford sufficient guarantee of the ocular evidence implicating Sadeque in the crime.
22. We also do not find any substance in the contention that there was inordinate delay in lodging the First Information Report. The occurrence took place between the night of the 4th and 5th of August 1966 and the informant, who was himself injured in the occurrence, lodged the First Information Report on the 5th August 1966 at 5 a.m. At the police station situated 101 miles away. In the facts and circumstances of the case we think that there was no delay in the lodging of the first information report.
23. We do not think there is any reason whatsoever to interfere with the impugned order of the High Court, and we accordingly dismiss both the appeals.