' Liaqat Ali son of Muhammad Aslam was convicted by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Faisalabad, vide his judgment dated 5-2-1983 for having caused the death of Mst. Abida Bibi and sentenced to suffer life imprisonment plus a fine of Rs,10,000 and in default thereof to undergo further four years' R.I. Under section 302, P.P.C. He was also convicted and sentenced to three years R.I. And a fine of Rs,1,000 or in default thereof to suffer further one year's R.I. Under section 452, P.P.C.
It was ordered that both the sentences of the appellant shall run concurrently. The appellant was, however, acquitted under section 354, P.P.C. By giving him the benefit of doubt. The appellant has filed CrA.No, 84 of 1983 challenging his conviction and sentence. The complainant Muhammad Rafique has moved Cr.Rev. No, 174 of 1983 under section 439, Cr.P.C. For enhancement of the sentence of the appellant from life imprisonment to death. The criminal revision was admitted to regular hearing by a learned Single Judge of this Court vide order dated 22-5-1985. The matters arise out of the same judgment and as such we propose to dispose of both the matters together by this consolidated judgment.
2. Shortly stated the prosecution story is that Muhammad Rafique complainant is a tailor by profession. On 22-2-1981 at about 11 a.m. While he had gone to the place of his work, in his absence Liaqat Ali (appellant), who is related to complainant through his brother-in-law Abdul Hameed, came to his house and disclosed to Mst. Zahra Bibi wife of the complainant that her younger sister Mst. Razia had sent an urgent call for her and that she was waiting for her in her house. On this information, Mst. Zahra Bibi went to the house of her sister. Mst. Abida Bibi aged about 15/16 years, daughter of the complainant, was left alone in the house. After a short while, the appellant Liaqat All came again in the house and closed the door from inside immediately and made advances towards her. These advances of the appellant were resisted by Mst. Abida Bibi by raising an alarm.
On this, the appellant whipped out a knife and caused injuries with it on the abdomen, head and hand etc., of Mst. Abida Bibi. On hearing alarm, Fazal Din P.W.9, Abdul Rashid P.W.10 and Muhammad Idrees (not produced) reached the spot and witnessed the occurrence. The appellant ran away from the spot. On receiving the information the complainant and Fazal Din took the injured to Civil Hospital for treatment and obtained the medical certificate therefrom. He stated that on account of the serious condition of the victim, he remained busy in her treatment all the time. On death of Mst. Abida Bibi, on 26-2-1981, the offence was altered from section 307, P.P.C. To section 302, P.P.C. By the investigating officer.
3. Iqbal Hussain S.I. P.W.12 investigated the case. On 23-2-1981, he recorded the F.I.R. Ex.PE on the statement of Muhammad Rafique. In civil hospital, Faisalabad, the police officer recorded the statement of Mst. Abida Bibi injured, and Mst. Zahra Bibi P.W. Under section 161, Cr.P.C. He visited the spot and recorded the statements of remaining witnesses. Blood-stained earth was collected from the spot and was taken into possession vide memo Ex.PD. Muhammad Rafique on 24-2-1981 produced before the witness shirt P.5, Shalwar P.6 of the deceased which were taken into possession vide memo. Ex.PF. The appellant was arrested on 28-2-1981. The appellant while in police custody led to the recovery of knife P.4 from underneath a tree after digging it out from the graveyard of Choormajra in presence of Muhammad Saddique P.W.4 and Abdul Aleem (given up).
Site-plans Ex.PB and Ex.PB/1 were prepared by Aurang Zeb Draftsman P.W.3 on 1-3-1981 on the instructions of the police officer. The Chemical Examiner and the Serologist gave their positive reports vide Ex.PO and Ex.PQ, respectively which were tendered in evidence.
4. Dr. Bashir Kahloon P.W. 13 on 22-2-1981 at 12-05 p.m. Examined MstAbida Bibi and found the following injuries on her person:--
(1) A stab wound 2 c.m. x 1 c.m. x depth not probed on the front of right lower chest. The wound was oblique.
(2) A stab wound 3 c.m. x 1/2 c.m. x depth not probed on the front of left lower chest. Wound was vertical.
(3) A stab wound 1/2 c.m. x 1/2 c.m. x depth not probed on the front of right middle abdomen 13 c.m.
Below the umblicus at 6 'o clock position.
(4) A stab wound 2 c.m. x 1/2 c.m. x muscle deep on the front of right thigh.
(5) A stab wound 2 c.m. x 1/2 c.m. Muscle deep on the back of right thigh.
(6) An incised wound 3 c.m. x 1/2 c.m. x bone deep on the front of right hand.
(7) An incised wound 3 c.m. x 1/2 c.m. x bone deep on the front of right side of head. Corresponding cuts on the shirt and Shalwar were present.
' The condition of the injured was serious. Injuries No,1, 2 and 7 were kept under observation. All the injuries were caused by sharp-edged and pointed weapon and were found to be fresh.
5. On 26-2-1981 at 11 a.m. The said Doctor conducted the post-mortem examination on the dead body and found the following injuries on her person:--
(1) A stab wound stitched 2 c.m. x 1 c.m. Going deep on the front of right lower chest. The windlass oblique.
(2) A stab wound (stitched) x c.m. x 1/2 c.m. Going deep on the front of left lower chest. The wound was vertical and was directed downward.
(3) A stab wound (stitched) 1/2 x 1/2 c.m. Going deep on the front of right middle abdomen 3 c.m.
Below umblicus at 6 O'clock condition.
(4) A stab wound (stitched) 2 c.m. x 1/2 c.m. x muscle deep on the front of right thigh.
(5) A stab wound (stitched) 2 c.m. x 1/2 c.m. x muscle deep on the back of right thigh.
(6) An incised wound (stitched) 3 c.m. x 1/2 c.m. Bone deep on the front of right side of hand.
(7) An incised wound (stitched) 3 c.m. x 1/2 c.m. Bone deep on the right side of hand.
(8) A laprotomy wound (stitched) on the left side of abdomen.
' In the opinion of the Doctor the death occurred due to shock and hemorrhage as a result of injuries No,1 and 2. These injuries were sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. All the injuries were ante-mortem and were caused by sharp edged and pointed weapon. The probable time between injuries and death was within about four days. The time between death and postmortem examination was within about ten houRs,
6. Fazal Din P.W.9 and Abdul Rashid P.W.10, both neighbors of the complainant, provided an eye- witness account and supported the prosecution version in its detail. Fazal Din P.W.9 stated that Rashid P.W.10 and Idrees (not produced) were sitting with him at about 10/11 a.m. When they heard an alarm from the house of the complainant. They immediately went there. The witness deposed that it was the appellant who inflicted 4/5 knife blows to Mst. Abida Bibi in their presence. The victim fell down on the ground on receipt of the injuries. He also stated that they attempted to catch the appellant but he threatened them with the knife and as such was able to run away from the spot with his weapon. To the same effect is the statement having heen made by Abdul Rashid P.W.10.
' The appellant while making a statement under section 342, Cr.P.C. Denied the allegations levelled against him and disclosed that mother of the deceased wanted to marry her with him and that three days earlier to the occurrence, the deceased refused to marry the son of Fazal Din P.W.9 in presence of the Nikah Khawn and other eye-witnesses and that on account of refusal, complainant and Fazal Din P.W.9 inflicted injuries to her and that he had been implicated falsely in the case.
However, in support of his plea, the appellant did not lead any evidence in defence.
7. Learned counsel contends that from the facts and circumstances of the case, it is established that Fazal Din P.W.9 and Abdul Rashid P.W.10 did not at all see the occurrence and that they had deposed evidence in favour of the prosecution only because they happened to be neighbours of the complainant. Learned counsel maintains forcefully that there is delay of about 22 hours in lodging the F.I.R. And that no plausible explanation in that behalf has been given by the complainant. Learned counsel has also submitted that it is apparent from the medical evidence that two types of weapons were used in the infliction of injuries to the victim. In this behalf, the learned counsel has placed reliance.. On the evidence deposed by Dr. Bashir Kahloon P.W.13.
Learned counsel urges that the children of locality disclosed to Mst. Zahra Bibi, that her daughter had been done to death by some unknown assailants. This being so, according to the learned counsel, the occurrence was not witnessed by the prosecution witnesses. Lastly, it is argued forcefully that the inordinate delay, referred to above, in the lodgment of the FIR, demonstrates that during this period, the appellant had - falsely been implicated in the case. The learned State counsel has supported the conviction and sentence of the appellant. The learned counsel for the complainant submits that there are no mitigating circumstances and as such the appellant should have been sentenced to death inasmuch as he had committed a brutal murder of a young lady.
8. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties at considerable length and have perused the record. We do not find any substance in the arguments raised and argued by the learned counsel for the appellant. There appears some delay in lodging the FIR, however, from the facts and circumstances of the case it is clear that there is an ample explanation for this delay. Muhammad Rafique P.W.6 on receipt of the information immediately returned home and took the injured to Civil Hospital, Faisalabad, for her treatment. The injured was admitted in the hospital in a critical condition where she died on 26-2-1981. Dr. Bashir Kahloon P.W.13 deposed that the injured was in a serious condition and that she was unconscious when brought in hospital. Thus, in the circumstances, in view of the the serious condition of the victim, it was not expected of the father of the victim to leave her alone there and to go to the police station to lodge the report. His first duty was to make efforts to save life of the injured. This was, of course, done by him. The delay in lodging the FIR has been found by us to be of no significance at all. We, therefore, proceed to repel the argument of the learned counsel. Fazal Din P.W.9 and Abdul Rashid P.W.10 are the two most natural witnesses in the case being neighbours of the complainant. Both of them reached the spot on hearing the alarm of unfortunate girl without losing time. This is in the evidence that Fazal Din P.W.9 and Abdul Rashid P.W.10 were sitting together at a distance .Of 10/11 yards away from the spot at the time of occurrence. In other words, they were sitting within the hearing range of the alarm being raised by the victim. According to medical evidence, the victim received as many as 7 injuries on her person. The evidence of eye-witnesses is wholly in line with the medical evidence.
These witnesses stated that in their presence the appellant inflicted 4/5 injuries to the deceased. It is therefore natural that by the time the witnesses would reach, the appellant might have already caused some injuries to the victim. The eye-witness account, therefore, stands corroborated by the medical evidence. There is nothing on the record that Fazal Din P.W.9 and Abdul Rashid P.W.10 deposed evidence on account of some lc ill will or malice. Even otherwise, no enmity what so ever, was suggested to the witnesses by the defence during the lengthy cross-examination of these witnesses. This being so, the eye-witness account goes unchallenged by the defence. The appellant was arrested on. 28-2-1981 and while in police custody, he led to the, recovery of knife P4 from the graveyard of Chormajra. The recovery of knife P4 also lends support to the prosecution evidence. The said knife was found stained with human blood as reported by the Serologist vide his report Ex.PQ. We are, therefore, convinced that the prosecution has successfully proved its case against the appellant beyond reasonable doubt. The eye-witness account inspires confidence and is worth reliance. In the circumstances, we are of the view that the appellant was correctly convicted and sentenced by the learned trial Court. However, there appears no justification whatsoever to enhance the sentence of life imprisonment of the appellant to death at this belated stage. Further, the motive as set up by the prosecution is shrouded in mystery inasmuch as there is no evidence in support thereof. No doubt, the statement of the deceased was recorded by the investigating officer under section 161 Cr.P.C. But the said statement was never proved as required by law. We are, therefore, of the view that the sentence already awarded to the appellant is justified in law and evidence available on record.
9. The upshot of the above discussion is that the appeal and the revision both being without substance, are dismissed.