RIAZ AHMAD, J.--Appellant Rehmat A.I alias Rehmu son of Lal Din, Jat by Caste, resident of Bhoona Wali Police Station Daska district Sialkot was tried by the Punjab Special Court for Speedy Trial at Gujranwala on charge under section 302, PPC on four counts and also on the charge under section 436, PPC for having committed the murders of Muhammad Hanif, Muhammad Jamil, Irshad Begum and Jaffar Saeed and for having put the house of Mst. Rabia Bibi on fire.
2. The learned trial Judge, vide his judgment, dated 28th of March, 1988 found the appellant guilty on both the aforesaid charges. Accordingly, on the charge under section 302, P.P.C., on four counts, the appellant was sentenced to death on each count, and to pay a fine of Rs. Fifty thousand, or in default whereof to suffer rigorous imprisonment for five years. On the charge under section 436, PPC, the appellant was sentenced to undergo life imprisonment, and to pay a fine of Rs. Fifty thousand only or in default thereof to suffer regorous imprisonment for five years. The learned trial Judge also directed that in the event of the recovery of fine, the same was ordered to be paid to complainant Rabia Bibi.
3. Aggrieved by his conviction and sentences, the appellant has preferred this appeal, and we propose to dispose of the same through this judgment.
4. The tragic occurrence took place during the night intervening 27th and 28th of December, 1983 in village Bhoona Wah situated at a distance of about eight miles from police station Daska. The occurrence was reported by complainant Mst. Rabia Bibi PW-8 on 28th of December, 1983 at about 8.30 a.m. To Muhammad Akram Sub-Inspector in village Bhoona Wali. Muhammad Akram Sub- Inspector PW 11 recorded the said statement of the complainant Exh. PD, and sent the same to the police station for the registration of the case. Formal FIR Exh. PD/1 was drawn at the police station by Abdul Latif Muharrir Head Constable PW.2 at 9.30 a.m. On the same day.
5. The complainant Mst. Rabia Bibi in her statement Exh. PD stated, that she and her sister Mst.
Sardar Bibi were married in one family. The appellant was the son of the sister of the complainant.
Ten years before the occurrence, the appellant was married to Mst. Rashidan daughter of Nawab Din a brother of the husband of the complainant. Out of the said wedlock between the appellant and Mst. Rashidan, two sons were born. Four years before the occurrence, the appellant shifted to Sindh for residing there with Muhammad Sharif, a maternal---uncle of Rashidan Bibi. The appellant after having lived there for two years, returned to village Bhanooa Wali, and his coming back, he was informed that Rashidan Bibi had been kept by Muhammad Sharif her maternal-uncle, and he had been turned out from the house of Muhammad Sharif. The appellant then brought back his wife Rashidan Bibi through the intervention of the Punchayat. After about two months, Rashidan Bibi was again taken back by her maternal---uncle Muhammad Sharif to Sindh. Wife of the appellant Rashidan Bibi then instituted a suit for dissolution of marriage against the appellant in Sindh. During the proceedings of the suit, the appellant had compromised, and had brought back his sons, and had also received an amount of Rs. Ten thousand in lieu of the divorce. According to the complainant, the appellant had suspected that the complainant and her sons were responsible for the ruination of his (appellant's) family, and had on a number of occasions told the co-villagers, that he would also destroy the house of the complainant in the same way as the complainant and her sons had ruined his house.
6. On the fateful night the complainant heard some voices, and thus awoke, and saw that the appellant was standing in the courtyard alongwith three others, who were holding the gallons.
Complainant enquired from Rehmat A.I appellant, as to what was the matter, who answered the complainant, and pushed her inside the Kotha, and chained the door from outside, and having sprinkled the kerosene oil on the door, the same was put to fire. Complainant raised hue and cry, upon which, her son Muhammad Jamil and his wife Irshad Begum awoke, and tried to come out of the room, but the fire had spread, and both Muhammad Jamil and his wife Irshad Begum could not come out. The complainant tried to save herself, but received burns, and in the meanwhile, the door after having burnt, fell down, whereupon, the complainant rushed outside, and after raising hue and cry, went to the shop, and noticed that the shop had also been put on fire, in which, the son of the complainant, namely, Muhammad Hanif and Jaffar Saeed a young boy the son of the daughter of the complainant were sleeping. Hue and cry raised by the complainant attracted Murad A.I, Ghulam Hussain s/o Sher Muhammad villagers who reached there, and saw the appellant running away alongwith his associates. Thereafter, all the villagers extinguished the fire, and noticed that the son of the complainant Muhammad Jamil, his wife Irshad Begum, Muhammad Hanif other son of the complainant and a young boy namely Jaffar Saeed a son of the daughter of the complainant had died.
7. On 29th of December, 1983 Dr. Gul Nawaz, P-7 Medical Officer Civil Hospital Daska conducted the post-mortem examination on the dead body of Muhammad Hanif and found: Superficial burns (Ist degree) were present on front of neck, whole face, right hand and lower half of right forearm, left hand and lower half of left forearm, front of whole chest, left side of abdomen just below chest.
Death in the opinion of the doctor had occurred due to suffocation by inhalation of poisonous gas produced by burning. Burns were ante-mortem and of first degree.
8. On the same day, the same doctor also conducted the post-mortem examination on the deadbody of Irshad Begum and noticed the following: "Whole body from head to foot was burnt with fracture of right tibia and febula. They were also burnt. The burns were deep."
9. On the same day, the said doctor also conducted the post-mortem examination on the dead body of Muhammad Jamil deceased, and noticed the following: "The whole body was burnt on the front and back with feet, legs, hands face and head. Burns were deep:"
10. The same doctor conducted the post-mortem examination on the dead body of Jaffar Saeed on the same day and noticed as follows: "Superficial burns present on the whole face on front of neck, upper part of chest, right shoulder, right lower arm and hand, left shoulder, posterior part of left arm and hand:"
Death in the opinion of the doctor had occurred due to suffocation and inhalation of poisonous gas produced by burning.
11. On 28th of December, 1983 Dr. Zahida Yunus, PW.6 medically examined the complainant PW-8, and found seven burn injuries on her body. She complained of the sensation caused by burns.
12. On 21-1-1984 Muhammad Zamurad Khan, SHO Police Station Daska PW.1 obtained non-bailable warrants of the appellant for his arrest. The appellant had absconded, and the said warrants were entrusted to Constable Sultan Ahmad PW-3 for execution of the same. On 31-1-1984, the SHO, moved an application, Exh. PB and a proclamation Exh. PB/1 was issued, and the same . Was pasted on the house of the appellant as well as on the Court's premises of Tehsil Daska. The appellant could not be traced out, and therefore, reports Exh. PA/1 and PB/2 were made by Sultan Ahmad, and thus the appellant was declared as an absconder.
13. On 3rd of August, 1987, Zaffar Iqbal ASI PW-5 police station Daska received a telephonic information from police station Kherrpur (Sindh) with regard to the whereabouts of the appellant.
On the receipt of this information, the ASI proceeded to Kherpur, and took the appellant into custody on 4th of August, 1987.
14. In order to prove its case at the trial, the prosecution placed reliance upon the ocular testimony furnished by Rabia Bibi complainant PW-8, and Ghulam Hussain PW-9. Complainant PW-8 also deposed about the motive, and Siraj Din PW-10 Chairman of the union council Kandan Sian also supported the question of motive to corroborate the complainant. In addition thereto, the prosecution also placed reliance upon the medical evidence and the abscondence of the appellant.
15. When examined under section 342, Cr.P.C. The appellant transversed the prosecution case in its entirety and while professing is innocence made the following statement: "My maternal-uncle Muhammad Saeed and Ghulam Hussain PWs are close associates of Mst.
Rabia Bibi. In every litigation, they support each other. I and my mother had agricultural land in village Bhoona Wali which falls between the two blocks of the land owned by Ghulam Hussain PW, who had installed a tube-well in one block, and wanted to pass on his water through our land, but I did not allow him to do so by demolishing his water-course, and therefore he wanted to eliminate me and after involving me in this false case, he has succeeded to purchase the share of my mother in our land. Muhammad Saeed purchased approximately the whole land belonging to his brothers and nephews. Muhammad Jamil and Muhammad Hanif had many enemies. I had no motive to commit this gruesome crime."
16. The appellant also entered the witness-box, and made statement under section 340, Cr.P.C., and also produced Ghulam Haidar DW.1 and Allah Wadhaya DW-2. The appellant also produced a certified copy of the sale-deed Exh. DA in respect of the land purchased by Ghulam Hussain from the mother of the appellant after the occurrence.
17. DW.1 Ghulam Haidar stated that his house was situated near the place of occurrence. On the day of occurrence, he was sleeping in his house, and he had seen the house of Muhammad Jamil set on fire. He had raised a hue and cry, and Mst. Rabia Bibi had come out of her house. She was perplexed and had sustained burns on her face. She told that she did not know, as to how and who had set her house on fire.
18. D.W-2 Allah Wadhaya is the father of Muhammad Jamil and Muhammad Hanif deceased. DW-2 stated that he had reached the spot, and had made enquiries, and the complainant had expressed her ignorance about the occurrence and the actual culprits. Ghulam Haidar DW.1 is a brother of the complainant, while DW-2 Allah Wadhaya was once her husband. Allah Wadhaya DW.2 had divorced the complainant about 30 years before the occurrence. The complainant Mst.
Rabia Bibi had also been ousted from the house of DW-2 Allah Wadhaya, because it was stated that she was a lady of easy virtue. DW-2 Allah Wadhaya had contracted the second marriage after divorcing the complainant. In cross-examination, DW-2 categorically stated that the complainant used to commit thefts and lead unchast life, and had developed illicit relations with several persons in the village, and he used to accuse her of Zina Kari. The witness further deposed that Rabia Bibi PW-8 started her evil ways since her marriage with him.
19. With the assistance of the learned counsel for the appellant, we have carefully perused the entire record, and we have also heard the various contentions raised by the learned counsel at length.
20. It was vehemently argued that the complainant PW-8 Rabia Bibi was a liar, and had not seen the actual culprits. According to the learned counsel of the appellant, it was an unwitnessed crime, and out of the sheer enmity, the complainant has falsely involved the appellant in this case.
21. It was next contended that the version with regard to the awakening of the complainant after hearing some voice in her courtyard and then coming out of the room and then to have seen the appellant and to have made enquiry from him is nothing but concoction.
22. It was next contended that the version of the complainant to have seen the appellant in the manner as stated above had been deliberately introduced to burden the appellant with liability.
23. It was further argued that motive part of the prosecution case did not help it, inasmuch as, it was a marital dispute between the appellant and his wife, which had come' to an end as a result of compromise, and even then, if the appellant had any motive, it would have been against his wife Rashidan or with her maternal-uncle Muhammad Sharif who resided in Sindh, therefore, the motive in this case could not be believed.
24. The learned counsel for the appellant further argued, that the appellant was not at all in the village, and had gone to Sindh, and the police had in a mala fide manner got him declared an absconder. Reliance was also placed upon the defence evidence led by the appellant, and particularly, the statement of DW-2 Allah Wadhaya father of deceased and husband of the complainant. In the said statement, DW-2 had branded the complainant Rabia Bibi a woman of easy virtue.
25. After anxious consideration, we are of the view that the appellant closely related to the complainant side being the son of the sister of the complainant, thus, we are not prepared to believe, that a woman would go to the extent of involving a son of her sister in a false case on a capital charge. The background and the motive has been explained in detail in the F.I.R. As well as in the statement made by complainant Rabia Bibi. Rashidan Bibi wife of the appellant happened to be the daughter of the brother of her husband. It is evident that the appellant and his wife Rashidan were close relations of complainant, and there is nothing on the record to suggest that the complainant or the sons of the complainant would be responsible for the disaster of the family of the appellant. But it is something different, if a person rightly or wrongly considers some one responsible for his misery and agony, and some times, even the devil does not know what is in the mind of a man. Gruesome murders take place on trivial matters. After detailed scrutiny of the entire evidence, we are of the view, that statement of P.W.10 Siraj Din Chairman of the Union Council is inspiring and nearer the truth. He deposed that the appellant used to think and consider the complainant and her sons to be responsible for the ruination of his (appellant's) family, and had professed, that he would also destroy the complainant's family in the same way as his family had met with. P.W.10 had no axe of his own to grind, therefore, we are of the view, that the motive as sought to be established by the prosecution stands proved on the record of this case. There is nothing to discard it.
26. Adverting to the ocular testimony and the criticism made by the learned counsel of the appellant, we would at the very outset express, that the criticism is unjustifiable. There is nothing odd in the claim of the complainant to have arisen during the mid-night after hearing the voices in her verandah. Complainant sufficiently is an old woman, and it is well-known that sleep of the old persons is soon disturbed even by the slight noise/voice. Furthermore, we are not prepared to believe that both t ho house and shop of the complainant were set on fire by some unknown persons inasmuch as, we believe that complainant did see the appellant, and had also made enquiries from the appellant who was standing in the courtyard of her house alongwith his associates as stated in the F.I.R.
27. We have also carefully perused the testimony of Ghulam Hussain PW-9. He is an independent witness and is not related to either side. His house situates near the place of occurrence, therefore, he had reached the spot after having heard the voices -and having seen the fire. Having reached the scene of occurrence, he had seen the appellant while running alongwith his associates. Ire was cross-examined at length, but nothing could be elicited to show that he was deliberately telling lie, or was bent upon involving the appellant falsely. He had no motive to do so, and therefore, we are of the view that the complainant stood fully corroborated by the testimony of Ghulam Hussain P.W.9.
28. As far as abscondence of the appellant is concerned, the same also[ furnishes corroboration to the prosecution, because the abscondence has to be judged in the light of the circumstances of each case, as held by the Supreme Court PLD 1969 SC 89 Gul Hasan and another v. The State.
29. Upshot of the above discussion is that the prosecution has successfully proved its case against the appellant beyond any shadow of doubt. We do not find any mitigating circumstance in this case. This was a gruesome crime resulting into four murders and loss of property. In this view of the matter, we find no merits in this appeal, and the same is hereby dismissed. Death sentence awarded to the appellant is hereby confirmed. Conviction and sentences on both the charges arc upheld.
M.Y.H./R-155/L