Rashid Aziz Khan, J.- Hassan Muhammad along with his sons Ghulam Haider, Liaqat Ali and Ghulam Nabi were sent up for trial by Police Station Khankah Dogran, District Sheikhupura, under section 302/34 PPC for the murder of Mehram Ali. The Additional Sessions Judge, Sheikhupura vide his judgment dated 6.7.1986 gave the benefit of doubt to Hassan Muhammad, Liaqat Ali and Ghulam Nabi and acquitted them. Ghulam Haider however was found guiIty and sentecend to imprisomnet for life and a fine of Rs.10,000/-, or in defauIt four years R.I. Under section 302 PPC. He was also given the benefit of section 382-B Cr.P.C. It was directed that the fine, if recovered, half of it shall be paid to the legal heirs of Meharam Ali, deceased as compensation. Ghulam Haider has appealed against his conviction which shall be disposed of by this judgment.
2. The prosecution story, in brief, as disclosed by Sarang, brother of Mehram Ali, deceased, is to the effect that on 13.8.1985 at about 6 a.m., he came to the house of his brother Mehram Ali in order to enquire about his grand daughter who was running temperature. At that time, Mehram Ali was not in the house, therefore, he enquired from Zanib Bibi, wife of Mehram Ali about the whereabouts of his brother. She informed that Mehram Ali had gone to the house of Lambardar to borrow some money. Sarang, one Nazir Ahmad and Zanib Bibi were sitting in the court-yard near the cot of ailing child when at about 6:30 a.m. Mehram Ali came. When he reached near his house, Hasan Muhammad came out of his house and raised a lalkara that Mehram Ali should be done to death.
His sons Uaqat Ali armed with a carbine, Ghulam Nabi with Sota. And Ghulam Haider with a carbine, came out of their house. Hassan Muhammad caught hold of Mehram Ali but he got himself released from the grip of Hassan Muhammad and entered his court-yard. Mehram Ali after entering the courtyard beseeched the accused persons to spare him. In the meanwhile, Uaqat Ali fired with his carbine hitting on the left forearm and right thumb. Haider s/o Hassan Muhammad climbed the deori of Hassan Muhammad's house and fired with his carbine hitting on the chest of Meharm Ali, whereupon he fell down. Thereafter Ghulam Nabi gave a Sota blow on the left knee of the injured. Hassan Muhammad deaIt a chhuri blow on the right hand thumb of Mehram Ali. Uaqat Ali gave him kick blows by saying that he had been taught a lesson for injuring him. The witnesses out of fear did not try to rescue. After the commissin of the offence, all the accused ran away.
Mehram Ali died at the spot because of the injuries.
The motive as given in the FIR, is that two months before the present occurrence, Muhammad Younis son of Mehram Ali had injured Uaqat Ali, accused with a knife for which a case under section 307 PPC was registered against Mehram and his son Muhammad Younis. Mehram Ali was bailed out a few days befroe the said occurrence in the said case.
3. FIR Exh.PG was lodged on 13.8.1985 at 7:30 a.m. By Sarang, PW-7 at Police Station Khankah Dogran.
It was recorded by Muhammad Ayyub, ASI, PW-11.
After the registration of the case, Muhammad Ayyub, ASI visited the spot and found the deadbody lying in the courtyard of his house. He prepared the inquest report and injury statement Exh.PJ and PK, respectively, and sent the deadbody for postmortem examinatin. Blood-stained earth from the palace of occurrence was secured vide memo Exh. PE. An empty cartridge P.5 was found lying on the roof of the deori of the house of the deceased which was secured vide memo Exh.PF. The said memo was got attested from the witnesses. He got prepared the site plan Exh.PA and Exh.PA/1 of the place of occurrence form the Draftsman and gave . His notes in red thereunder. He arrested the appellant and other accused on 20.8.1985, and thereafter the investigation was taken over by Muhammad Naseem, Inspector/SHO.
Muhammad Naseem, SHO,PW-12, party investigated the case. On 24.8.1985, Ghulam Haider appellant while incustody led to the recovery of carbine P.3 from a Bharola in his house. It was secured vide memo Exh.PC. He arrested Hassan Muhammad accused on 9.9.1985. After necessary investigation, he challaned the accused.
Dr. Asif Mahmood, Medical Officer, DHQ Hospital, Sheikhupura, on 13.8.1985 at 4 P.M., conducted the postmortem examination of the deadbody of Mehram Ali and found the following injuries:- 1
1. Wound of entrance 1cm x 1cm on the palmer aspect of right thumb.
2. An exit wotInd 1cm x 1cm on the back of right thumb and the thumb bone was fractured.
3. Wound of entrance 1cm x 1cm on the back of lower part of left forearm.
4. An exit wound 1cm x 1cm on the lateral side of lower part of left forearm.
5. An abrasion 1cm x 1cm on the medial side of right knee joint.
6. An abrasion 1cm x 1.5cm on the left side of chest 5cm medial and upper side of left nipple just on the sternum.
7. Abrasion 1cm 2cm on the right side of chest 4cm below the right nipple.
8. Swelling 5cm x 4cm on the occipital region of head.
9. A lacerated wound 15cm x 10cm x skin deep on the left side of back of head.
10. Penetrating wound 1cm x 1cm on the epigastrium passing under the skin to the right chesl wall from where one pellet was found.
11. A penetrating wound 1cm 1cm on the left side of chest 3cm medial to left nipple, fracturing the 5th costal cartilage, tearing the upper wall of the heart and passing into the right lung and fracturing the 6th rib. A pellet was found under the right chest wall.
12. A penetrating wound 1cm x 1cm on the left side of chest just above injury No.1l, which had fractured the 5th left costal cartilage and passed through the right lung and fractured the 5th rib on the right side. A pellet was found lodged under the right chest wall just below injury. No.1l.
13. Penetrating wound 1cm x 1cm fracturing 5th costal cartilage of left side, passing through right lung and fracturing the 7th rib. One pellet was found under the skin of right chest. Chest cavity was full of blood.
14. Penetrating wound 1cm x 1cm on the right side of chest 3cm medial to the right nipple. The pellet has passed under the skin and found from the skin of right chest wall.
In his opinion, injuries Nos.11,12 and 13 were collectively and individually sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. Injuries Nos.8 and 9 were caused with blunt weapon and the rest were with firearm.
4. The prosecution in support of its case produced 12 witnesses in all. PW-1 Rab Nawaz prepared the site plan Exh.PA and Exh.PA/1 of the place of occurrence on the pointation of the witnesses. Yar Muhammad. FC,PW-2 delivered the crime empty in the office of Forensic Science Laboratory on 19.8.1985. So long it remained with him, nobody tempered with it. He also delivered a sealed parcel containing carbine on 12.9.1985 in the office of Forensic Science Laboratory. Ijaz Ahmad, PW-4, witnessed the recovery of carbine P.3 at the instance of Ghulam Haider and attested the Memo Exh.PC Muhammad Yaqoob, PW-6 witnessed the recovery of blood stained earth from the courtyard of the house of Mehram Ali, deceased, which was secured vide memo Exh.PE. He also witnessed the recovery of empty cartridge P.5 and attested the recovery memo Exh.PF. The eye- witness account was furnished by Sarang, Nazir and Mst. Zanib, PWs-7,8 and 9, respectively. The doctor who conducted the postmortem examination on the deadbody of Mehram Ali, appeared as PW-10. The investigation was conducted by Muhammad Ayyub, ASI, and Muhammad Nasecm, SHO, PWs-11 and 12, respectively. The learned Prosecutor gave up Iqbal Bibi, Muhammad Sadiq, Muhammad Abbas and Ahmad Ali, as unnecessary. He tendered in evidence the report of Chemical Examiner Exh.PL, of the Serologist Exh.PM and of the Forensic Science Laboratory Exh.PN and closed the case of the prosecution.
5. It is contended by learned counsel for the appellant that Sarang and Nazir, eye-witnesses, have been disbelieved by the learned trial Court and the conviction has been recorded only on the uncorroborated statement of Mst. Zanib Bibi who may not be relied upon. Contends that the recovery of carbine was effected from a place which was not in the exclusive possession of the appellant, therefore, same may not be relied upon. Contends that the recovery witnesses are interested and inimical. The contetions of the learned counsel for the appellant have been controverted by learned counsel for the State.6. I have heard the learned counsel and gone through the evidence with their assistance. As far as the time and place of occurrence are concerned, this has not been disputed by the defence. In these circumstances, I hold that Mehram Ali, deceased, was done to death at about 6:30 a.m. In side the court-yard of his house.
Appellant Ghulam Haider while in custody, led to the recovery of carbine P.3 which was secured vide memo Exh.PC. Ejaz Ahmad, PW-4 is son of Mehram Ali, deceased, He has been cross-examined at length but the defence has not been able to bring out anything on the record to indicate that he did not witness the recovery. The contention of the learned counsel that the witness is a relation of the deceased, therefore, may not be relied upon is without force because the recovery at the instance of the appellant was effected from his house, which is next to the house of this witness. In cross- examination, he stated that he did not go to the Police Station to join the recovery proceedings; instead the police associated him when they came to his village. Even otherwise also, the recovery w?.s attested by Muhammad Nasim SHO,PW-12 who was cross-examined on the point of recovery of carbine, and a suggestion was given to him that the carbine P.3 got recovered by him did not have striking pin and was not in working condition. The suggestion clearly indicates that the defence had accepted the recovery of carbine at the instance of Ghulam Haider appellant, and its case was that the said carbine was not in a working condition. In these circumstances, I hold that the recovery of carbine P.3 at the instance of the appellant is proved.
Muhammad Yaqoob, PW-6 witnessed the recovery of empty cartridge P.5 from the roof of deori of the deceased. He has been cross- examined at length but the prosecution has not been able to bring anything on the record to indicate that he was an interested witness or inimical. He has only stated that the deceased was from his bradri. This fact, in itself, would not make the witness inttcrested or inimical. In cross-examination, he further stated that he learnt about the murder Mehram Ali and then came to his house, though he lived at a distance of about 3h miles from the house of the deceased. The explantion given by this witness about his presence at the spot is convincing. Therefore, I hold that Muhammad Yaqoob, PW, witnessed the recovery of crime empty P.5 from the deori of the deceased and he can safely be relied upon.
The eye-witness account in this case has been furnished by Sarang, Nazir and Mst. Zanib Bibi, PW- 7,8 and 9, respectively. As far as Sarang and Nazir are concerned, they have not been relied upon by: the learned trial Court simply on the ground that both of them are not the resident of the village. Sarang, PW, was brother of the deceased, whereas Nazir PW was father-in-law of the son of the deceased. The explanation given by these two PWs with regard to their presence at the spot is that they had learnt about the ilIness of grand-daughter of the deceased, therefore came to enquire about her heaIth. During cross-examination, they could not even give the correct name of the child about whom they had came to enquire. They did not even know the naturp of ailment of the child. In these circumstances, I hold that the learned triat Court has rightly ruled out of consideration the statements of these two witnesses.
As far as Mst. Zanib Bibi, widow of Mehram Ali, deceased, is concerned, I hold that she is a natural witness. The occurrence took place inside her house at about 6:30 a.m. And at that time she was expected to be present in her house. She has given a detailed account of occurrence in the way it transpired. She was cross-examined at length, but the defence has not been able to bring on record anything to indicate that she was not present or did not witness the occurrence. Therefore, I hold that Mist., Zanib Bibi was present at the spot and witnessed the occurrence.
The contention of the learned counsel for the appellant that Mst. Zanib Bibi has already been disbelieved with regard to the acquitted co- accused, therefore, cannot be relied upon unless corroborated has some force Mst. Zanib Bibi, in her statement had also attributed overt act to the coaccused of the appellant but had been disbelieved. In these circumstances, I hold that she can be relied upon only if her statement is corroborated by some independent evidence. The crime empty was delivered in the office of Forensic Scinece Laboratory on 19.8.1985. The appellant was arrested by Muhammad Ayyub, ASI on 20.8.1985 a day before the crime empty had been received in the office of Forensic Science Laboratory. Four days after his arrest he got recovered carbine P.3 which was sent to the office of Forensic Science Laboratory later on. According to the report Exh.PN of the Forensic Science Laboratory, crime empty P.5 was fired from the Carbine P.3 recovered at the instance of the appellant. In these circumstances, I hold that the recovery of carbine at the instance of the appellant and the recovery of crime empty from the house of the appellant read with the report of the Forensic Science Laboratory Exh.PN serves ample corroboration to the statement of Mst. Zanab Bibi.
Mst. Zanib Bibi has also been corroborated by the medical evidence. She had stated in Court that Ghulam Haider, appellant climbed on the roof of their deori from where he fired at Mehram Ali hitting on his chest. The doctor who conducted the postmortem examination, admitted that the line of fire was slanting. Since the appellant was standing at a higher place than the deceased therefore, the direction of the injury was slanting. This fact also corroborates the testimony of Mst.
Zanib Bibi.
For what has been discussed above, I hold that the prosecution has successfully proved its case against the appelInt, Therefore, his appeal fails which is, accordingly, dismissed.