S. A. NUSRAT, J.--The petitioners and their co-accused Muhammad Anwar, Fazil and Yousuf were tried under section 148/341 read with section 149 of the Pakistan Penal Code and sections 382/149, 302/49, P.P.C. By the Sessions Judge, Gujranwala. The petitioners were convicted under section 302/34 of the Pakistan Penal Code and were sentenced to imprisonment for life and fine of Rs.7,000 each and in default of payment of fine to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for three years. Both were further convicted under section 302 read with section 34 of the Pakistan Penal Code and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for five years and fine of Rs.3,000 or in default of payment of fine further rigorous imprisonment for one year. The sentences were ordered to run concurrently.
Half of the fine was ordered to be paid to the legal heirs of the deceased. The remaining three accused were given benefit of doubt and were acquitted of all the charges. The petitioners filed separate appeals in the High Court which were dismissed as per impugned judgment.
2. The occurrence in the case had taken place on 14-10-1972 at 11-00 p.m. In Chowk Ghantaghar Gujranwala and the F.I.R. Was lodged by the deceased at 1-20 a.m. In the hospital in the early hours of the morning on 15-10-1972. The deceased was a Hakeem by profession and the motive was some dispute over land with the acquitted accused Muhammad Anwar and Fazil. The deceased was attached by Muhammad Shafique alias Billa with a Chhuri while petitioner Muhammad Saleem had snatched a bag containing certain documents from the deceased. The conviction in this case is based on the dying declaration of the deceased which was believed on examination by the learned two Courts who found that the deceased had no motive to involve the petitioners in the case. The statement was also attested by Dr. Muhammad Riaz, Medical Officer who had examined the deceased at earlier stage as confirmed by Muhammad Saeed, Inspector.
3. It was contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that in this case three investigations were made one after the other. On one of the investigations made by a D.S.P. All the accused were discharged. It was on the basis of the third investigation made by Inspector Sabir, that the petitioners and four other persons were put on trial. The learned counsel also referred to a certified copy Exh. D.A. Purporting to be the copy of the statement of the deceased, which contained some discrepancy with regard to the name of the accused. This document was not put to any witnesses and its genuineness was never allowed to be tested. The same, therefore, is of no value at all.
4. The trial Court had found that the statement of the deceased was further corroborated by the testimony of Dr. Ahmed P.W.9 and Muhammad Saeed P. W .12. The learned High Court has rightly held that no corroboration of the statement of deceased was required qua the two petitioners because the deceased was absolutely disinterested witnesses against. Them. Such finding is indeed unexceptionable.
No point of law arises in the case. The petition is dismissed.