' ABDUL WAHEED, J.-Muhammad Ishaque, aged 35 years, has filed an appeal against the, judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sahiwal, dated 29-11-1980, whereby he was convicted under section 302, P.P.C. On two counts for the murder of Mst. Zainab alias Rani, aged 18/19 years, and Mst. Haleeman, aged 42143 years, and sentenced on each count to death and to pay a fine of Rs,5,000 or in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years. It was directed that half of the fine, if recovered, would be paid to the heirs of the deceased as compensation.
There is also a reference before us under section 374, Cr.P.0 for the confirmation of the sentence of death awarded to the appellant. Both these matters shall be disposed of by this judgment.
2. Both the deceased were real sisters. The occurrence was reported by Muhammad Yaqoob (P.W.1), their brother, at Police Station Renala Khurd about fourteen miles away from the spot on 7- 2-1978 at 3.00 p.m. Vide F.I.R. Exh.P.A. Which was recorded by Moharrir Head Constable Abdul Aleem (P.W.8) in the F.I.R., it was alleged that the appellant wanted to marry Mst. Zainab alias Rani deceased. Muhammad Yaqoob (P.W.1), her brother, did not agree and he performed her Nikah with Allah Ditta, his cousin, on the day of occurrence, viz. 7-2-1978 at 8-00 or 9-00 a.m. The appellant felt aggrieved by it. On the same day at about 12-00 noon or 1-00 p.m. Both the deceased went to the sugarcane field for urination. When they were returning, the appellant with a dagger in his hand came there running and raising Lalkara. Both the deceased started running. When the deceased reached near the house of Allah Ditta Barbar (P.W.5), the appellant overtook Mst. Zainab and inflicted on her blows with his dagger, as a result of which she fell down in a dried watercourse and started bleeding. Mst. Haleeman deceased intervened to save Mst. Zainab. The appellant attacked her also with the dagger and she also fell down bleeding. Both the deceased succumbed to the injuries at the spot. The occurrence was witnessed by Muhammad Yaqoob (P.W.1), Muhammad Ishaque Lambardar (P.W.4), Allah Ditta Barbar (P.W.5) and. Jagdev (P.W). Who was given up at the trial as unnecessary. They tried to apprehend the appellant but he threatening them with dire consequences ran away towards his house and climbing up the roof of his house started raising Lalkaras that he, would appear after committing the murder of two more persons. On the above report, a case under section 302, P.P.C. Was registered.
3. S.I. Nafees Ahmad Khan (P.W.10), the then Station House Officer, Police 'Station Renala Khurd, investigated the case. When he reached the place of occurrence on the same day he found that the appellant was present on the roof top of his house with a blood-stained dagger in his hand.
The Sub-Inspector got him down, arrested him and recovered from him blood-stained dagger P.1., vide memo Exh.P.E. The S.I. Also removed from his person blood-stained shirt P.2 and Chaddar P.3 and took them into possession vide memo Exh.P.F. He sealed the dagger P.1 and the clothes P.2 and P.3 into two parcels. The recovery memorandas Exh.P.E: and Exh.P.F. Were attested by Muhammad Ishaque Lambardar (P.W.4) and Raja Ghulam Sarwar P.W., who was given up at the trial as unnecessary. The above articles, according to the reports Exh.P.T of the Chemical Examiner and.
Exh.P.U. Of the Serologist were stained with human blood. The S.I. Also prepared injury statement Exh.P.N. And inquest report Exh.P.O. In respect of Mst. Zainab deceased and injury statement Exh.P.Q.
And inquest report Exh.P.R. In respect of Mst. Haleeman deceased and sent their dead bodies to the mortuary for post-mortem examination. He also made certain other recoveries from the spot and after finalizing the investigation challaned the appellant.
4. Dr. Safdar Ali (P.W .2), Senior Medical Officer, Civil Hospital, Okara, conducted autopsy on the dead body of Mst. Zainab alias. Rani deceased on 8-2-1978 at 10-30 a.m. And found the following injuries:-
(1) An incised stab wound 2" x 1" x bone deep on the front of right upper arm 1" below shoulder.
(2) A stab wound 3" x 3/4" x muscle deep on the front of right forearm, 2" below the elbow.
(3) A stab wound 1" x 1" x muscle deep on the front of right forearm i" below the elbow joint.
(4) A stab wound 1-3/4" x 1" x heart and lung deep on the right breast just above the nipple.. The injury went into the chest between 3rd and 4th ribs 2" from the middle line. Right lung upper lobe, peritonium and right auricle of heart were cut through and through. Right chest was full of blood.
(5) A stab wound 1" x 1" x muscle deep on the back of right chest scapular region.
(6) A stab wound 11" x 1" x abdomen deep on the back of abdomen left side, renal angle, muscles and spleen were cut, abdomen was full of blood.
(7) A stab wound 2" x 1" x muscle deep, 11" from injury No, 6 outer side.
(8) A stab wound li" x 1" x muscle deep on the front of left upper arm, 5" below the shoulder.
(9) Incised wound l (1/2) x 3/4" x bone deep on the outer side of left shoulder.
(10) Incised wound 11" x 1" x muscle deep on the inner and back of left wrist and hand.
(11) A stab wound 1-3/4" x 1/2 x lung deep on the outer side of left Chest, 4" below and outer side of left nipple. Injury went into the chest between 7th and 8th ribs. Left lung was injured. Left chest was full of blood. Shirt and vest and Shalwar were cut and blood-stained against, injuries of chest, abdomen and upper limbs.
5. In the opinion of the Medical Officer, the death occurred due to shock and haemorrhage caused by injuries Nos. 4, 6 and 11. Injuries Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5 and 7 to 10 were simple. All the injuries were ante- mortem and inflicted with sharp-edged and pointed weapon. Injuries Nos.4, 6 and 11 were sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. The probable time that elapsed between the injuries and the death was within a few minutes and between the death and the post-mortem examination within 24 hours. Exh .Pt C. Is the post-mortem examination report and Exh.P.C/1 is the diagram showing the locale of the injuries.
6. The above. Medical Officer on the same date at 12-00 noon performed the post-mortem examination on the dead body of Mst. Haleeman deceased and observed the following injuries:-
(1) An incised wound 2" x x muscle deep on the back of left upper arm 31" above the elbow joint.
(2) A stab wound 2" x 1/2" x chest deep on the outer side of left chest, below the axilla 51" from left nipple and going into pleural cavity between 7th and 8th, ribs. Left lung was cut. Left chest was full of blood, diaphram was also cut.
(3) A stab wound 1-3/4" x 1" x abdomen and kidney deep on the outer side of abdomen, left side 51" from umbilicus. Wound went into the abdomen injuring the large intestiners, stomach and left kidney. Abdomen was full of blood and food and faeces; corresponding parts of shirt and vest were cut and bloodstained.
6. In the opinion of the Medical Officer, the cause of death was shock and haemorrhage due to injuries Nos.2 and 3 which were sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. Injury'
No,1 was simple. The injuries were ante-mortem and had been caused by a sharp pointed weapon.
The probable interval between the injuries and the death was within a few minutes and between the death and the post-mortem examination within .24 hours. Exh.P.B is the post-mortem examination report and Exh.P.B. /1 is the diagram showing the locale of the injuries.
7. The Medical Officer stated in his cross-examination that the death of the two, deceased.: could occur within 5 to 10 minutes of the infliction of the injuries.
8. The appellant pleaded not guilty to the charge under section 302, P.P.0 on two counts for the murder of the two deceased. When examined under section 342, Cr.P.C., he denied the prosecution case and the recovery of blood-stained dagger P.1 ascribed to him. He owned the shirt P.2 and Chaddar P.3, but according to him they were stained with blood subsequently. While pleading innocence he narrated the occurrence as follows:- ' "I had been living in the house .Of Mat. Zainab deceased for complete 9/10 years as Ghar Damad and was engaged with. Mst. Zainab alias Rani and during this period I had been supporting the family of the deceased. Thereafter, I was turned out of the house of the deceased. Subsequently, Mst. Zainab deceased was given in Nikah to Allah Ditta cousin of the complainant. People started taunting me that for 10 years I had been supporting the family of the deceased, whereas Mst.
Zainab was given in Nikah to Allah Ditta. On the day of occurrence Allah Ditta also taunted me that he had been married with Mst. Zainab, who was previously engaged with me. On this I became highly provoked at the spur of moment. In the meanwhile, I saw Mst. Zainab deceased on the Banna of the sugarcane field. I stabbed her under grave and sudden provocation. In the meantime, Mst. Haleeman deceased also emerged from the sugarcane crop. She held me from my testicles and started to squeeze them. I also inflicted injuries with dagger to Mst. Haliman in order to save my life. I did under Ghairat and in self-defence."
' He adduced no evidence in defence.
9. Muhammad Yaqoob (P.W.1) who is the complainant and brother of the two deceased deposed to the motive. He stated that the appellant wanted to, marry Mst. Zainab alias Rani deceased but he did not agree and instead performed her Nikah with Allah Ditta, his cousin, on the day of occurrence at about 8-00 or 9-00 a.m. According to him, the appellant had a grouse on this account. In his cross-examination, he said that it was two years prior to the occurrence that the father of the appellant had demanded the hand of Mst. Zainab for the appellant but he had turned down his request at that time. There was no suggestion in his cross-examination that his testimony as regards the motive was not correct.
10. The ocular account of the occurrence was provided by Muhammad Yaqoob (P.W.1), who as mentioned above is the brother of the two deceased, Muhammad Ishaque (P.W.4), who is the Lambardar of the village, and Allah Ditta (P.W.5), near whose house the crime was perpetrated. All of them consistently deposed that on the day of occurrence the appellant armed with a dagger chased the two deceased and overtaking Mst. Zainab deceased caused her injuries with the dagger. Mst. Haleeman tried to rescue Mst. Zainab when she was also given dagger blows by the appellant. Both the deceased fell down and died at the spot as a result of the injuries. According to them, the entire occurrence had taken place in their presence and that of Jagdev P.W. Who was given up as unnecessary. They further stated that they tried to apprehend the appellant but he threatening them with dire consequences ran towards his house and climbed up its roof. The villagers surrounded the house while Muhammad Yaqoob P.W. Left for the police station to report the matter. The veracity of the witnesses remained absolutely unshaken and their testimony proved beyond doubt that both the deceased died as a result of the injuries caused to them by the appellant with dagger P.1.
11. Sub-Inspector Nafees Ahmad Khan (P.W.10) deposed to the recovery of blood-stained dagger P.1. He said that when he reached the spot he found the appellant present on the top of the roof of his house with a blood-stained dagger in his hand. He got him down and recovered from him blood-stained dagger P.1, vide memo Exh.P.E., and removed from his person blood-stained shirt P.2 and Chaddar P.3 and took them into possession vide memo Exh.P.F. Muhammad Ishaque (P.W.4), who is the Lambardar of the village, attested the recovery memoranda and supported the Sub- Inspector in his statement.
12. The learned counsel for the appellant has frankly conceded in his arguments that the appellant has been rightly convicted under section 302, P.P.C. On two counts for the murder of the two deceased. He has, however, urged that the extreme penalty of death is not called for in this case. In this connection, he has referred to the statement of the appellant made under section 342, Cr.P.C.
And reproduced above. The appellant has pleaded that Mst. Zainab alias Rani deceased was engaged to him, that he lived in the house of her family for nine or ten years and supported them, that subsequently when the Nikah of Mst. Zainab was performed with Allah Ditta, the people started taunting him that he had been supporting the family of Mst. Zainab for ten years but she had been given in. Nikah to Allah Ditta, that on the day of occurrence Allah Ditta also taunted him similarly, that he got highly provoked and stabbed Mst. Zainab under grave and sudden provocation and that meanwhile Mst. Haleeman deceased appeared on the scene and started squeezing his testicles and he injured her in self-defence. None of the pleas, however, was suggested to any of the witnesses in cross-examination. There is no iota of evidence on record to show that any of the pleas raised by the appellant was even plausible. Obviously the statement of the appellant was merely an afterthought and a contrivance. Since the appellant had acted in a very brutal and gruesome manner, the learned trial Judge was perfectly justified in imposing on him the death penalty on two counts.
13. In the result, we uphold the conviction and sentence of the appellant on two counts and dismiss the appeal. The sentence of death is confirmed.
1986 MLD 940 [Lahore)
Before Akhtar Hasan, J MUHAMMAD ISMAIL and another--Appellants versus THE STATE--Respondent Criminal Appeal No, 55 of 1976, decided on 10th December, 1983.
(a) Penal Code (XLV of i860)- -t-S. 471--Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 537, Explanation--Prevention of Corruption Act (II of 1947), S. 5(2)--Using a forged document as genuine--Joinder of two accused--Objection as to joinder not raised before Trial Court but raised first time before High Court--No prejudice having been caused to accused on that account nor any occasion existed for creating confusion to mislead accused or to suffer any failure pf justice--Objection in respect of joinder of accused, held, could not sustain in circumstances. [p. 9421 A & B
(b) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)-- ---S. 471--Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 537, Explanation-- Prevention of Corruption Act (II of 1947), S. 5(2)--Counterfeiting documents--Accused forged University degrees and Result Card for himself, without having qualified these examinations, with help of co-accused, an employee of University--Testimony of evidence adequately bringing home guilt of accused-- Conviction upheld.
[p. 943] C & E
(c) Penal Code (XLV of 1860)- ---S. 471--Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 537, Explanation--Prevention of Corruption Act (II of 1947), S. 5(2)--Counterfeiting documents--Co-accused a University employee having hand in conduct of examinations, forging university degree for himself and for sale after getting illegal gratification--Co-accused having no explanation for Result Card sold by him--Specimen and routine writing of accused tallying with his signatures on Result Card--Expert opinion against him not shattered and accusation against him not seriously assailed-- , Guilt of accused adequately brought home against accused--Conviction and sentence maintained. [p. 943] D & E Ghulam Hussain Qureshi for Appellants. Irshad Ahmed for the State.
Date of hearing: 6th November, 1983.
' This criminal appeal is preferred by appellants Muhammad Ismail son of Ghulam Hussain, resident of Bhikike, Tehsil Pasrur, District Sialkot, and Muhammad Rashid son of Faiz Muhammad, resident of Gali No, 22, Qadir Park, Samanabad, Lahore, against their conviction in a corruption case decided by Ch. Mumtaz Muhammad Khan, the then Special Judge, Anti-Corruption, Lahore, vide his judgment dated 6-1-1976. Appellant Muhammad Ismail was awarded R.I. For 3 years with a fine of Rs,1,000 under section 471, P.P.C. Read with section 5 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption. Act, 1947 and in default to further R.I. For 9 months. Likewise the other appellant Muhammad Rashid an official of the Punjab University, was sentenced to R.I. For 5 years with a fine of Rs,5,000 under section 468, P.P.C. Read with section 5(2) of the Act, ibid, and in default to further R.I. For 1 year.
2. The precise allegation against Muhammad Ismail was that he forged for himself (i) a degree of B.A. Exh. P.A. On a Form which' was then obsolete, (ii) a result card of B.Ed. Exh. P.M. In a colour other than the one prescribed, and (iii) another result card of M.A. Urdu, Exh. P.B., without having legally qualified these examinations. It was alleged that he forged these documents with the help of co- appellant Muhammad Rashid who was an employee of the Punjab University and then by using them he got higher scales, etc. From his employer, and the District Council, Sialkot.
3. Against the other appellant Muhammad Rashid, the allegation was that, he besides helping his co-appellant, had been selling such fake degrees, etc to people for monetary considerations.
Result card for Matriculation Exh. P.C. Relating to Muhammad Arshad in addition to two others, was sold by him to Liaqat All (P.W.4) for Rs,1,500.
' A B.A. Degree Exh. P.O. Was given by him to Muhammad Afzal, another such degree Exh. P.Q. Was prepared by him for himself, and made applications Exhs. P.R. And P.S. Respectively on 10-1-1969 and 3-4-1969 to the Food Department for a job showing himself either F.Sc. Or B.A.
4. Both of them pleaded not guilty to the charges and were tried. The plea of appellant Muhammad Ismail at the close of the trial was that he had been falsely involved due to enmity with his colleagues like Ghulam Muhammad, etc. Who were jealous of the results of his classes. The other appellant Muhammad Rashid explained that since police wanted to involve an official of the Punjab University, their eye fell on him ana that he was made a scape-goat only to fulfil their requirement. No evidence was led in defence.
5. Counsel for the appellants strenuously contended that the joinder of the two accused- appellants was not warranted inasmuch as there was not indication if the two were acting in concert and that since the evidence produced against them was exclusive showing no nexus between them, the trial was vitiated.
6. I am afraid, if the objection could be made at this stage as it was not raised before the trial.
Court. Explanation to section 537, Cr.P.C. Will preclude the appellants to raise it now Besides, in the charge framed against the appellant Muhammad Rashid, it was specifically provided that he had been selling fake degrees, etc. For illegal gratification not only to his co-accused Muhammad Ismail but also others. Even if, therefore, the evidence was missing to establish any sale of such documents by him to his co-accused Muhammad Ismail, a clear mention in the charge that he had been selling them to others was enough to make him understand what was the precise indictment against him. Thus, there was little occasion for creating any confusion to mislead them or to suffer any failure of justice. All the more the evidence being somewhat watertight against them individually, they were supposed to have met it, and in fact they did. It was wrong to contend that any prejudice was caused to them in this behalf.
7. On facts, it was abundantly shown by appellant Muhammad Ismail's colleagues like P.Ws. 2 and 3 that they knew for certain because he did not disclose his Roll No, in B.A. Examination that the Degree which he carried was ingenuine. That is why they called upon the authorities again and again to. See to it. P.W.7 Qamar Zeman, Assistant Controller of Examinations of the University of the Punjab, made the matter extremely clear in telling that the duplicate Degree Exh.P.A. Held by the said appellant was bogus inasmuch as it was scribed on a Form which had been rendered obsolete since 1961, and was no more in use in the year to which it apparently related. He firmly deposed that it had never been issued by the University. He brought forth the result-sheet for the year 1961 which, according to him, contained bogus entries against serial No, 7998 and it did not bear the signatures of Prof. Abdul Hameed Sheikh. He explained that on the basis of these bogus entries in the result-sheet, a duplicate degree of B.A. Was obtained by the appellant Ismail.
Additionally, he averred that the degree itself did not bear the signatures of Siddique Ahmad Khan, Controller. Of course, he admitted that this appellant did qualify the B.Ed. Examination, but the result card Exh.P.M. Was not genuine especially when he having failed in B.A. Was not eligible to qualify it. In regard to the result card Exh. P.B. Of M.A. Urdu, he reiterated that the entry in the result- sheet was bogus as it did note bear the signatures of Prof. Abdul Hameed and further that the result card intended for another Roll No, viz. 6953 was misused by him against his own Roll No, 6956 by interpolating his own name. Although he was cross-examined at length but he affirmed that having worked with both the aforesaid' officers of the University, he had sufficient knowledge of their signatures and could safely say that neither the result-sheet nor these testimonials bore their signatures. There was no reason why his testimony should be ignored altogether. His conviction was rightly recorded.
8. The case against the other appellant Muhammad Rashid is rather worse. He was an official of the Punjab University having had a hand in the conduct of examinations, etc. Qamar Zaman (P.W.7) in detail referred to other documents like Degrees Exhs. P.N. And P.O. And of course the appellant's own Degree Exh. P.Q. As all forged. Although he did not say in specific terms that they had been forged by the said appellant, yet in the typical circumstances of the case and more so by virtue of his appointment in the relevant office, a presumption arises that it was all his performance. It lay heavily on him to account for at least his own Degree Exh.P.Q. Which did not tally with the result sheet where it was instead shown to belong to one Muhammad Rashid son of Jan Muhammad of Dera Ghazi Khan. He had absolutely no explanation in regard to the result card Exh. P.C. Which he had sold for Rs,1,500 to Liaqat Ali (P.W.4). His specimen and routine writings were compared with his signatures on the result card Exh.P.C. By the expert P.W.14. Those all tallied. It was hard to ignore this expert opinion which could not be shattered on any ground whatsoever. He did not seriously assail the accusation in regard to his own Degree Exh.P.Q. Whose falsity transpired from his own applications Exhs. P.S. And P.R. Wherein he within a span of four months showed him either a graduate or F.Sc. This conspicuous inconsistency in his own writing simply helped the prosecution to prove its case that he was a master-mind in counterfeiting such documents.
9. The other evidence examined by the prosecution may not be much in point but it, does not help the appellants either, for the material already discussed above by itself quite adequately brings home the guilt against both of them. There is no merit in this appeal, and the same is accordingly dismissed maintaining their conviction as also the sentences under the respective heads. Warrants of their arrest be sent to the District Magistrate and the S.P. Concerned for their arrest and commitment to jail to serve out the remaining portion of their sentences.