1. ' GHULAM MUJADDID, J.--Muhammad Sarwar son of Ali Muhammad, Arain, resident of Mauza Ghasit Pura, District Faisalabad, has petitioned through jail. He seeks leave to appeal against the judgment of the Lahore High Court dated 11-5-1985.
2. ' The High Court confirmed the death sentence awarded to the petitioner for the triple murder of Mst. Seeman, Muhammad Yaseen and Mst. Naziran on each count.
3. The petition is barred by twenty-eight days. Nevertheless in the interest of justice and as it is a petition through jail, we condoned the delay and heard the counsel on merits.
4. Allegation against the petitioner was that on 20-6-1979 at 6 p.m. Within the area of village Punj Ahata while armed with Chhuri, he fatally injured Mst. Seeman and Muhammad Yasin. Mst.Naziran was also injured. She too died. In this incident Siraj also received injuries.
5. ' Report was lodged by Bagh Ali, father-in-law of the petitioner at Police Station Warburton on 20- 6-1970 at 7.15 p.m. It was recorded by A.S.I. Abdul Majid.
6. ' The petitioner was married to Mst. Maqsoodan, daughter of Bagh Ali, three years prior to the occurrence. Muhammad Sarwar being son-in-law of Bagh Ali used to visit the house of his father- in-law. He became fond of his sister-in-law Mst. Seeman. The liason ultimately developed into illicit relations.
7. ' Bagh Ali did not like that. He reprimanded the petitioner and warned him to stay away. The petitioner continued with his love affair.
8. ' On the day of occurrence, Bagh Ali, Siraj Din, the three deceased and Alam P.W. Were going in a Tonga of Bashir from Warburton. They were followed by another. Tonga. The party was going to their village after the marriage of Siraj. They hired the Tonga from bus-stand. When they were in between their village and Warburton, the petitioner came out from a Charri crop. He had a Chhuri in his hand. He stopped the Tonga in which the three deceased were travelling. He inflicted Chhuri blows to Mst. Seeman in the left side of flank and her private part near uterus. Then he attacked Mst. Naziran. She was injured in her left flank. Thereafter, he inflicted blows to Muhammad Yasin. He received injury in the abdomen near the chest. Two Chhuri blows were given to Siraj Din on the left side of buttocks.
9. ' The party made an attempt to apprehend him but he managed to escape. According to Bagh Ali, Bashir, Sardar Muhammad, Muhammad Aslam, Umar Din and Siraj Din saw the occurrence.
10. ' Statement of Bagh Ali is fully corroborated by Siraj Din. His presence cannot be doubted. He was injured.
11. ' Similarly, Bashir Tonga driver supported the testimony of Bagh Ali and Siraj Din.
12. The petitioner in his statement before the trial Court admitted the fact that he was on visiting terms with his father-in-law but denied his illicit relations with Mst. Seeman. He also denied the other allegations for instance that he stopped the Tonga, that the party tried to catch hold of him or that Chhuri belonged to him.
13. ' He admitted the occurrence not as alleged by the prosecution but gave his own account which in his own words is as follows:-- "The real facts are that Mst. Seeman Bibi deceased developed love for me and tried to overpower me but I refused to accommodate her. But in spite of that she tried to have concealed meetings with me and compelled me that I should divorce Maqsoodan Begum and marry with her. This fact came to the knowledge of the complainant who protested with me and tendered apology which was accepted by him. Afterwards, I attended the marriage of Mst. Seeman and Siraj Din P.Ws.
14. Alongwith my mother and gave presents according to routine. On the fateful day of occurrence, when we were coming back from Faisalabad, we came down from the bus and hired only two tongas for going to village of the complainant. The ladies were on the tongas, when I, Yaseen deceased, Siraj Din P.W. And some other persons were following those tongas on foot. During the course of journey Yascen and I exchanged hot words and Yaseen deceased on the basis of those hot words and previous against me pulled out a knife from his pocket and inflicted injuries on me.
15. When I tried to run away Mst. Seeman deceased under the influence of her good will for me came to my help but Yaseen deceased inflicted injuries to her whereupon I snatched away the knife from him and in order to put off their attack I inflicted injuries to Siraj Din P.W., Yaseen deceased and Mst.
16. Naziran deceased in self-protection. I was admitted in the hospital after receipt of injuries and I was arrested from the hospital by police."
17. ' Now there are two versions - one given by the prosecution, the other is the accused's statement.
18. If the prosecution evidence is to be disbelieved then outright that deserves to be rejected but it is not so because we are convinced that the eyewitnesses were present. They saw the occurrence and deposed the truth.
19. ' The second alternative is that we have to examine the prosecution version in juxtaposition with the story of the petitioner.
20. ' If at all any credit is to be given to what the petitioner said then as the law requires his entire statement is to be accepted. If we accept that even then the petitioner's statement is not worth relying at all and we have no hesitation in rejecting it outright especially when he said, "When I tried to run away Mst. Seeman under the influence of her good will for me came to my help but Yaseen deceased inflicted injuries to her whereupon I snatched away the knife from him and in order to put off their attack I inflicted injuries to Siraj Din P.W., Yaseen deceased and Mst. Niziran deceased in self-protection." This is not believable. According to his own version, he had disarmed Yasin.
21. Thereafter, there was no justification to inflict injuries on empty handed persons like Yasin, Naziran and even Seeman.
22. ' We are, therefore, of the view that the petitioner was rightly convicted and sentenced. This petition is dismissed.