1. M. R. KHAN, J.-The appellant was convicted under section 302 of the Pakistan Penal Code for the murder of Abdul Mannan and sentenced to death. He was also convicted under section 13 of the West Pakistan Arms Ordinance, 1965 and sentenced to six month's rigorous imprisonment. The appellant preferred an appeal against his convictions and sentences. The appeal and the death reference were heard together by a Division Bench of the High Court of West Pakistan, Lahore. By a single judgment, the learned Judges dismissed the appeal, accepted the reference and confirmed the death sentence imposed on the appellant.
2. Abdul Mannan, deceased was the brother's son of Muhammad Younis (P. W. 13). They were originally the residents of village Milki in the District of Hoogli, West Bengal. Muhammad Younis settled at Jhullundur before the Independence and carried on business there. He has several sons of whom Muhammad Sharif (P. W. 18) is the approver in this case. Mst. Amna (P. W. 12) is the daughter of Muhammad Younis. After the establishment of Pakistan, Muhammad Younis migrated to Lahore and established business there. Mst. Amna was married to Abdul Mannan, deceased about 13 years ago. She had four children by that marriage. After his migration to Lahore, Muhammad Younis used to live with his family members includ--ing Mst. Amna and Abdul Mannan, deceased in a house in Kucha Acharyan, Gumti Bazar, Lahore. Later on; he built a house.
3. At Karim Park, Lahore and shifted there, leaving behind L1st. Amna and her husband Abdul Mannan, deceased in the house. In Kucba Acharyan. Muhammad Sharif used to occupy exclusively one of the rooms of his father's house at Karim Park. Muhammad Younis had his shop for polishing gold in Soha Bazar, while Abdul Mannan, deceased had his shop for polishing gold in Lohari Mandi. The appellant Abdul Khaliq also hailed from the village Milki in the District of Hoogli, West Bengal. He came to Pakistan on passport and used to do work of polishing gold ornaments. Abdul Mannan, deceased did not run his shop seriously with the result that his earnings were meagre. Mst. Amna used to demand money from the deceased for house-keeping and other purposes, but the deceased used to beat her. This ill-treatment strained the relations between Mst. Amna and the deceased. The appellant was friendly with Muhammad Sharif and used to visit the house of Mst.
4. Amna along with Muhammad S14arif. Mst. Ampa used to appear before the appellant. About three months before the murder of Abdul Mannan, the appellant came to the house of Mst. Amna along with Muhammad Sharif. On that day, the deceased had quarrelled with Mst. Amna and went away after abusing her. Mst. Amna served food to her brother Muhammad Sharif, and the appellant then sat near him. At that time, the appellant asked Mst. Amna to obtain divorce from her husband in order to get rid of daily quarrels between them. At this, Mst. Amna admonished him. Two months prior to the occurrence, the deceased again quarrelled with Mst. Amna when she demanded clothes from him. Mst. Amna then left the house of her husband and went away to her father's house at Karim Park to reside with her parents. Two keys of the locks of the house of the deceased were used to be kept by the deceased himself and two other extra keys of the same house were used to be kept with Mst. Amna. As she left for her father's house, she took away the two extra keys and sent the same to her father's shop for being kept there. Two or three days after her arrival at her father's house, Muhammad Sharif advised her to secure divorce in order to do away with the quarrels, but Mst. Amna declined it with resentment. One month before the occurrence, Muhammad Sharif called Mst. Amna to his living room where she found the appellant present. At that time, the appellant asked Mst. Amna to obtain divorce from her husband and to marry him.
5. Mst. Amna expressed great resentment at this sugges--tion and retorted that if he should talk like that in future she would complain about it to her father.
6. On the 12th December 1965, Muhammad Younig came to his shop at about 10-00 a. m. And came to learn from a customer from Lohari Mandi that Abdul Mannan, deceased had not yet reached his shop. The deceased who used to take his breakfast at the shop of Muhammad Younis. Did not turn up to take his breakfast on that day. Muhammad Younis then sent his another son Muhammad Zafar (P. W. 15) to the house of the deceased. As Zafar was late in returning, Muhammad Younis sent Barkat Ali (P. W. 14) to ascertain as to what had happened. This Barkat Ali used to sell fruits in a chabba in front of the shop of Muhammad Younis. Barkat Ali found Muhammad Zafar in the house of the deceased which was then closed from inside. They managed to get the door of the house opened and found Abdul Mannan, deceased lying dead on a cot in a pool of blood. Barkat Ali then went to the Police-station Lohari Gate and lodged a First Information Report at about 11-30 a. m.
7. The facts, as stated above, are revealed from the evidence of P. Ws. Muhammad Younis, Mst. Amna, Muhammad Zafar and Barkat Ali.
8. After the F. I. R. Had been lodged, the police came to the spot, held an inquest on the dead body of Abdul Mannan and sent the dead body to the morgue for post-mortem examination. The police recovered blood-scrappings from the floor of the deceased's house, one blood-stained chaddar (P. 18), one cot (P. 19) and two keys (P. 20 and P. 21) which were lying on the floor of that house.
9. On the 14th December 1965 Muhammad Sharif was produced before the police by his father, and the police arrested him. On the same day, at about noon time, the police arrested the appellant.
10. The police recovered one key (P. 13), one comb (P. 14) and Rs. 1.50 from the person of Muhammad Sharif. The police further recovered one passport, a registration certificate and Rs. 2 from the person of the appellant. As marks of injuries were there in the hands of both of them, they were got medically examined. Two days thereafter, i. e., on the 16th December 1965, the appellant led the Sub-Inspector of Police to his house and took out from an earthen pot, which was lying in one of the rooms of that house, his shirt, pant and a knife in the presence of Ghulam Muhammad (P. W. 7) and Khuda Bakhsh (P. W. 8) which were found to be stained with blood. Thereafter, Muhammad Sharif led the Sub-Inspector of police to his living room in his father's house in Karim Park. He opened the room with the key (P. 13) already seized from him by th.- police and from inside an almirah in that room he produced his bushirt and pant which were found to be stained with blood.
11. From the pocket of that pant six keys were recovered of which two (P. 4/1-2) were tied in a string and four (P. 5 to P. 8) were in one ring. These recoveries were made in the presence of Mirza Muhammad Iqbal (P. W. 9) and Kaley Khan (P. W. 10). The articles produced by the appellant and Muhammad Sharif were duly sent to the expert for examination and these were found by the Assistant Chemical Examiner to be stained with blood. The Serologist found that all these articles other than the bushirt and pant of Muhammad Sharif were stained with human blood. The Serologist could not, however, determine the origin of the blood-stains on the bushirt and pant of Muhammad Sharif as the blood-stains thereon had disintegrated.
12. On post-mortem examination, as many as 22 incised wounds were found on the dead body of Abdul Mannan, deceased. Besides, there were three. Other small cut marks. Death, in the opinion of the doctor, was due to those injuries. Muhammad Sharif had volunteered to make a confession.
13. The investigating officer made an application to the District Magistrate requesting him to tender pardon to him. Accordingly, pardon was granted to Muhammad Sharif op the 20th December' 1965 and on the same date Mr. Muhammad Masood Khan (P. W. 19), a Magis--trate of the First Class recorded the confessional statement of Muhammad Sharif. In that statement, Muhammad Sharif fully implicated himself and the appellant for the murder of Abdul Mannan and gave a detailed account as to how they made a conspiracy to murder him and the parts played by each in commit--ting that murder. At the trial also, Muhammad Sharif fully implicated himself and the appellant for the murder of the deceased. His evidence, in substance, is that he accepted the proposal of the appellant to murder Abdul Mannan. In accord--ance with the appellant's suggestion, he. Took the keys of the house of the deceased from his father's shop where these had been earlier kept by Mst. Amna. At about 8-00 p. m. On the date of occurrence, he along with the appellant went to the deceased's house opened the lock of the outer door, allowed the appellant to go in and then locked the door. The appellant opened a window at the rear through which he himself entered the room.
14. The deceased's own room was also under lock and key. The witness opened the lock of that room with one of the keys taken by him and allowed the appellant to go inside that room. There--after the witness locked that room also and managed to enter it through a window opened for him by the appellant. The appellant found a woollen chaddar there and directed the witness to put it on the deceased as he would enter the room. As directed, he put the said chaddar on the deceased as soon as he entered his room and held him in his arms. The appellant then started inflicting knife injuries on the person of the deceased and in the course of that transaction injured the witness's right hand where--upon he left the grip, but the appellant continued inflicting knife injuries and made the deceased lie on the cot and thereafter inflicted further knife injuries till he was dead. The appellant also got injured by the same knife at the back of his right hand. After their objective had been achieved, both of them went away to their respective houses.
15. The appellant pleaded innocence, but adduced no evidence. In this case, there was no ocular evidence of the murder, and the conviction of the appellant rested on the testimony of the approver Muhammad Sharif as corroborated by the recoveries of the incriminating articles and the injuries found in the hands of the approver and the appellant.
16. The appellant made a petition from jail for special leave to appeal. Leave was granted to consider whether the corroborative evidence as available in this case amounted to corroboration in material particulars of the testimony of the approver with regard to the complicity of the appellant in the murder of the deceased.
17. The extent and nature of corroboration of the testimony of an accomplice may vary from case to case. The rule of practice requiring corroboration of the evidence of the accomplice is that the corroboration must be in respect of some material particulars implicating the accused, and it is not necessary that evidence of the accomplice should be corroborated in every detail of the crime.
18. The rule as regards corroboration of the testimony of an accom--police, as stated by this Court in the case of Ghulam Qadir v. State (PLD 1959 SC 377) is as follows :- "As a matter of strict law, the uncorroborated testimony of an accomplice could, if accepted, from the basis of a conviction in a criminal case. However in the course of judicial precedents, a rule of prudence has been evolved under which it is always insisted that there ought to be independent corroboration of an approver's statement on material points suggesting a link between accused persons and the crime before such a statement could be accepted as a safe foundation for their conviction. The reason for the rule is obvious. There is always danger of substitution of the guilty by the innocent in such cases and it is realized that it would be extremely risky to act upon the statement of a self-confessed criminal who while trying to save his own skin, might be unscrupulous enough to accept suggestions of others to inculpate a person unconnected with the crime in place of his real accomplice for whom he may have a soft corner. But the corroboration required would depend on the facts and circumstances of each particular case and no hard and fast rules can be laid down in this behalf."
19. The appellant's motive for the murder, as it appears from the evidence of the approver, was to get rid of the deceased in order to have Mst. Amna as his were. Also the approver himself, as admitted by him in cross-examination, appeared to have an animus against the deceased as he had once abused and insulted the approver because of his protest against the beating of Mst. Amna by the deceased. The evidence of Mst. Amna furnished corroboration on the point of motive.
20. Both the trial Judge and the High Court believed the evidence of the approver as well as the corroborative evidence available in this case, and they were satisfied that the corroborative evidence lent support to the evidence of the approver in material particu--lars. The Courts below having arrived at this conclusion on evaluation of the evidence, this Court's interference with their conclusion is not called for. In the case of Ghulam Qadir v. State, cited hereinbefore, the conviction rested on the testimony of the approver and the corroborative evidence which was only the recovery of some incriminating articles at the instance of the accused. In that case, this Court refused to interfere with the conviction and the death sentence as the conclusion was reached by the Courts of fact on evaluation of the evidence. The present case stands rather on a stronger footing inasmuch as the approver' evidence was corroborated not only by the recovery of the incri--minating articles but also by the cut injuries found in the hands of both the approver and the appellant. Thus, there is no merit in this appeal, and I would, accordingly, dismiss it and affirm the judgment of the High Court.
21. M. YAQUB ALI, J.-I agree.
22. WAHIDUDDIN AHMAD, J.-I agree.