1. WAHEEDUDDIN AHMAD, J.-This appeal by special leave is directed against the judgment of the High Court of Sind & Baluchistan, Karachi, in Confirmation Case No. 44 of 1970 and Criminal Appeal No. 309 of 1970, dated the 10th November, 1971. By this judgment the death sentence of the appellants was confirmed and the appeal was dismissed.
2. Appellants, along with eight others, namely, Punhoon, Bachal, Setho, Chandio, Kamal, Jamal, Allahdino and Rahib, were tried by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Larkana, for offences under sections 302, 326, 324, 323 and 148, P. P. C, for the murder of deceased Hamid and causing injuries to P. Ws. Nabidad, Kadirbux, Rahim A.I, Wali Dino, Mohammad Khan and Naban. One Sodho, father of appellant No. 1, was also named as the person responsible for the murder of Hamid deceased. There are three absconders, namely, Ghulam Nabi, Gul Babar and Daim who are shown as accused persons.
3. There was a counter case in which the prosecution witnesses were the accused. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Larkana, acquitted all of them. All the ten accused from the appellants' party were convicted. The appellants were sentenced to death and all the ten accused were also sentenced to seven years' R. I. Under section 326 read with section 149, P. P. C. Besides other smaller terms of imprisonment. The appellants challenged the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Larkana in Confirmation Case No. 44 of 1970 and Criminal Appeal No. 309 of 1.970. In the Criminal Appeal and the Confirmation Case, the death sentences of the appellants were confirmed. Six of the accused persons were acquitted and the convictions and sentences of the others were varied. Except the appellants, no other person has pursued the matter further.
4. Leave was granted in this case to further examine the evidence produced against the appellants for safe dispensation of justice.
5. The prosecution case is that the complainant party was known to the appellants since before the incident. The appellants resided in village Saro Khan which was at a distance of about 21,0/250 paces from the village Mohammad Khan where the complainant Muhammad Khan lived. In the village Muhammad Khan, there are 20 houses belonging to the relatives of the complainant and in the village of the appellants there are about 30 houses belonging to the appellants and their relatives. It is alleged that one day before the present occurrence, in the morning, the complainant was sitting in his house when Abdul Karim and Shafi Mohammad came there. They told him that they were passing on the way by the side of the shop of Dino where appellants Nazar Mohammad and Dost Mohammad and accused Bachal abused them and told them as to why they were passing from there. It is a common thoroughfare and even motor cars ply on that road. The complainant told Abdul Karim and Shafi Muhammad that he would go and complain in this connection to deceased Sodhal, the Nekmard of the appellants' party. It is further alleged that on the day of occurrence at about after breakfast time, the complainant and P. W. Nabidad were sitting on the bank of Nangin water-channel by the side of the land of Khamiso. At that time, deceased Hamid was bringing cattle from his house. About the same time, appellant Doa Muhammad armed with a hatchet passed from that place along with his two bullocks. The appellant Dost Mohammad drove his two bullocks through the wheat cultivation of Khamiso which caused damage to the cultivation. On this, the complainant told Dost Mohammad appellant that on that day, he abused the complainant party and that today he damaged their wheat cultivation.
6. On this, appellant Dost Mohammad went on abusing the complainant and drove his bullocks to his village. Immediately after this, Dost Mohammad and Nazar Mohammad appellants, Bachal as well as deceased accused Sodhal and absconding accused Ghulam Nabi came at the place where the complainant and Nabidad were sitting. They were all armed with hatchets. They approached the complainant and P. W. Nabidad On seeing them, both the complainant and P.W. Nabidad raised alarm and on that, Hamid cattle running to them, He came between the complainant and P.W.
7. Nabidad and the above-named five persons and others and intervened. It is alleged that deceased accused Sodhal asked his four companions above-named to inflict blows on deceased Hamid. Accordingly, Dost Muhammad and Nazar Mohammad appellants and Bachal and the abscond--ing accused Ghulam Nabi inflicted blows with the sharp side of the hatchet to deceased Hamid, as a result of which Hamid, was injured on his hands, head, best and other parts of the body. Right hand of Hamaid was completely amputated due to the injuries with the sharp side of the hatchets. He foil down on receiving the injuries. Accused Bachal also inflicted blows with sharp side of the hatchet to P. W. Nabidad as a result of which Nabidad was injured on his left hand.
8. It is alleged that the complainant, P. W. Nabidad and deceased Hamid raised cries and alarm. On their cries and alarm, from the appellants' side, accused Rahib, Jamal, Kamal, Chandio alias Allabdad, Punhoon, Rehmatullah alias Setho, along with absconding accused Gul Babas and Daim came there. Accused Punhoon and Rebmatullah were armed with lathis and their remaining companions were armed with hatchets. From the side of the complainant on cries and alarm, P.
9. Ws. Walidino, Rahimali, Kadirbux and Naban came to the spot. Accused Punhoon and Rehmatullah inflicted blows with lathis to the complainant as a result of which he was injured on his back and head as well as other parts of the body. The other companions of the accused persons also inflicted blows with hatchet and lathis to P. W. Naban Kadirbux and Walidino as a result of which they were injured. All the accused persons after injuring the above-named Injured persons escaped towards their village and took away their weapons with which they were armed. The prosecution case is that at the tune of the present incident, none from their party was armed with any weapons and they did not inflict any injury to an), of the appellants or their companions.
10. The First Information Report was registered by the Head-constable Mohammad Azim incharge of the Police Station, Taluka Larkana at 2. 30 p. m. He noted the injuries on the persons of the complainant and sent him to Civil Hospital, Larkana for examination, treatment and certificate.
11. Immediately, thereafter, injured person P. Ws. Naban, defused mid, who was still alive but unconscious, Nabidad, Kadirbux, Rahmali arid Walidino were brought to the Police Station. Their injuries were noted down, vide mashirnama, Exh.
18. They were also sent to the Civil Hospital.
12. Larkana for examination, treatment and certificate. The Head-constable also recorded the statements of P. Ws. Rehimali, Nabidad, Kadirbux, Walidino ard Naban under section 161, Cr. P. C.
13. After the First Information Report by the complainant party was lodged, a counter-report Exh. 30, was made by Sodhal deceased, father of Dost Mohammad alias Doso appellant and uncle of appellant No. 2. It is as under:- "Complaint is that about 12 months back, Ghulam Muhammad son of Ghulam Kadir, Kandero son of Wali Mohammad, Ladho son of Jano and A.I Nawaz son of Piaro Lohar Burdi, residents of Saro Khan Burdi, fought with my son Dost Mohammad. Due to this grudge, we were not speaking with each other., Today after performing Iddul Azha prayers at Akbar Shah village, returned to our village. My son Dost Mohammad after taking meals, at about 12 noon drove his pair of bullocks to graze the same in his cultivation. When he reached near the houses of Mohammed khan Burdi, in the land of Khamiso Burdi then Nabidad son of Mohammad Khan. Abdul Karim son of Amirbux, Ladho son of Jano and Ghulam Mohammad son of Ghulam Kadir Burdi told my son that he should not pass near our houses and spoke hot words with each other. I was standing at that time on the shop of Dino.
14. On commotion I went there. On this, Piaro son of Khan Mohammadi Mohammad Khan son of Sevo, A.I Nawaz son of Piaro, Kadan son of Wali Mohammad, Walidino son of Lakhedino, Rahimali son of Allahbux, Hamid son of Khair Mohammad, Naban son of Haji, Hussainbux son of Walidino, Lal Khan son of Dato, Attur son of Mohammad Khan, Duro son of Meenho, Joti son of Dilmurad, and Kadirbux son of Kbair Mohammad, all Lobar Burdis attacked us. All had hatchets and lathis. From our side, for stopping the quarrel, came, Punhoon son of Samano, Mato son of Daryakhan and Neko son of Bachal Burdi Lohar. Above accused have given lathi blows to my son Dost Mohammad, Mato, Punhoon, Neko and felling them down had run to their houses. In the fight from the other side, Naban, Hamid, Nabidad, Rahimali, Kadirbux, Muhammad Khan and Walidino have received injuries.
15. I leaving injured at my village have come for report. I am complainant, investigation be made."
16. After these reports were made, Police Inspector Wazir Mohammad visited the spot. He found the wheat cultivation of Khamiso in Deh Mir Khan trespassed and damaged. At four or five places there was blood and the Inspector secured the blood-stained earth and sealed it into a parcel. A Mashirnama, Exh. 30, was also prepared.
17. The matter was investigated further. .Certain recoveries were made by the Inspector. Punhoon accused had injuries which were noted down in the presence of mashirs Allahdad and Karamali vide mashirnama, Exh.
19. Accused Punhoon was wearing a blood-stained shirt and a loin cloth on his person. They were secured and sealed into a parcel. Accused Punhoon had a blood-stained danda in his hand which was also secured by the Inspector and sealed into a parcel. Thereafter, accused Punhoon was sent to the Civil Hospital, Larkana for examination.
18. On the 20th February, 1969, Police Inspector Wazir Muhammad inter--rogated Nazar Muhammad appellant and arrested him. In the presence of mashirs Haji Allahdad and Karamali, he produced one hatchet from his house. Mashirnama, Exh. 22, of this recovery was prepared. Dost Muhammad appellant was also arrested on the same day. He had injuries on his person. Mashirnama, Exh. 21 of his injuries was prepared. Appel--lant Dost Muhammad then was interrogated by the Inspector in the presence of said mashirs. He produced a blood-stained hatchet from his house. This was secured by the Inspector vide mashirnama, Exh. 23.
19. The other accused persons were also arrested. They were questioned under section 342, Cr. P. C. At the trial. They denied their participation in the crime and pleaded innocence.
20. The prosecution case is supported by the eye-witnesses, P. W. 4 Mohammad Khan complainant, P.
21. W.
5. Nabidad, P. W. 6 Naban, P. W. 8 Kadirbux, P. W. 9 Walidino and P. W. 7 Rahimali. All six witnesses are injured and related to the deceased.
22. Mr. Muhammad Hayat Junejo, learned counsel for the appellants, has contended that it was one continuous incident and the learned Judges of the High Court have wrongly described it as two independent occurrences. The contention of the learned counsel appears to us to be well founded. : The proximity of time and place on which the incident took place shows that there was one continuous incident but this has no material effect on the decision of the case. There was a free fight between the parties and the learned Judges of the High Court have rightly held that each person was responsible for the part played by him in the occurrence. It is in evidence that Dost Mohammad and Nazar Muhammad appellants attacked the deceased Hamid and injured him as a result of which he died later on. This version is supported by all the eye-witnesses and the learned counsel for the appellant was unable to show us any contradiction in their statements. It is correct that these witnesses are related to deceased Hamid. In our opinion, the learned Judge of the High Court were, therefore, perfectly justified in looking for cor--roboration against the appellants. The appellants have produced hatchet, which have been found blood-stained. In such circumstances, there is sufficient corroboration against them. We, therefore, consider that the High Court was perfectly justified in convicting them for the murder of Hamid deceased under section 302, P. P. C. We do not find any ground to interfere with the conviction of the appellants.
23. Mr. Mohammad Hayat Junejo, learned counsel for the appellants, has contended that general amnesty was granted by the President and, therefore, the appellants' sentence should be reduced to transportation for life In a recent decision at Pashawar, we have considered this aspect of this question and we consider that in the circumstances of the present case, the appellants are entitled to reduction of sentence if not already reduced. We would, therefore, reduce the death sentence of the appellants to transportation for life.