' The legality of the judgment, dated 12-9-1987 pronounced by the learned Sessions Judge, Rahimyar Khan, has been questioned in this appeal, who had convicted Nazir Ahmad, the appellant, under section 302 of the P.P.C. And had awarded him imprisonment for life. The appellant was also fined Rs,10,000 or to suffer three years' R.I. In default thereof. He was also convicted under section 324 of the P.P.C. For injuring Mst. Manno P.W.14 and has been awarded two years' R.I. And a fine of Rs,1,000 or to suffer three months' R.I. In default thereof. The amount of fine under both the offences, if recovered, was ordered to be paid to Mst. Manno, the injured lady, and the only heir of Mst. Bashiran Bibi deceased. The sentences were ordered to run concurrently and the benefit of section 382-B of the Cr.P.C. Was extended to the appellant.
2. The facts of the instant case, which led to this gruesome murder, in substance, are that Mst.
Manno, the mother of Mst. Bashiran Bibi deceased, was married to Pk Bakhsh. After the demise of Pir Bakhsh, she contracted a second marriage with Allah Wadhaya, the complainant. Mst. Bashiran Bibi was the daughter of Pir Bakhsh, who was brought up in the house of the complainant. She was married to Nazir Ahmad, the appellant, about six years prior to this occurrence. On account of certain estrangement between the spouses, Mst. Bashiran Bibi used to often live in the house of the complainant. Mst. Manno, the wife of the complainant, was in an advanced stage of pregnancy and she called her daughter Mst. Bashiran to work in her house, which was taken exception to by the appellant, who had insisted that Mst. Bashiran should go to his house. Two or three days before this incident, Nazir Ahmad appellant came to the house of the complainant and asked his wife to accompany him, who refused. On 3-7-1985, at about 8-00 a.m., the appellant again came to the house of the complainant and repeated his demand of taking Mst. Bashiran with him. He was admonished that after the delivery of the baby, he could take Mst. Bashiran with him.
3. Allah Wadhaya, the complainant is an employee of Sui Gas Company. He intended to go to his office. Noor Muhammad, his brother, who is his colleague in the said Company, also came to his house. Both of them heard the shrieks of Mst. Bashiran from inside the house. They rushed in and saw the appellant giving dagger blows to his wife and when Mst. Manno, the complainant's wife, endeavoured to rescue her daughter, she also received blows with a dagger. They endeavoured to save the injured lady. In the meantime, the appellant ran away from the house with the weapon of offence. When Mst. Bashiran Bibi was being taken to the hospital for medical aid, the Police Officer met them in the way and they dictated the F.I.R. To him.
4. The police went to the spot and collected the blood-stained earth from the spot. They prepared the injury statement in respect of both the injured ladies. Mst. Manno was discharged from the hospital but Mst. Bashiran was admitted to the hospital and she died on 1-8-1985. The case under section 307 of the P.P.C. Was converted into one under section 302 of the P.P.C. The appellant was arrested on 4-7-1985, who produced his blood-stained shirt P.4 and blood-stained dagger P.S. After the completion of the investigation, the challan of the appellant was submitted. As a result of impugned trial, he was awarded the aforementioned punishment.
5. The autopsy on the dead body of Mst. Bashiran was conducted by Dr. Muhammad Azhar Iqbal P.W.9 on 1-8-1985 and he had observed the following injuries on her corpse:--
(1) A laparotomy wound (sealed) about 20 c.m. In length at the centre of the abdomen.
(2) Scar of wound (seems to be stabbed) in a circle of about 1 c.m. On the left lumber region.
(3) Scar of a wound (stabbed) on 6th inter costal space on left side, size 1 c.m.
(4) Scar of an incised wound on the left middle of thigh on the outerside 1.5 c.m. x 1/2 c.m. x 3 c.m.
(5) Scar mark on the 7th inter costal space on the right side of chest size 1.5 c.m.
(6) A stab wound (open on the right side of upper part of right sc ,pula. Size about 1 c.m. In circle.
' According to this Medical Expert, injury No,3 had accelerated the death of Mst. Bashiran and all the injuries were sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature.
6. Dr. Miss. Naheed Akhtar Qureshi P.W.1 had observed the following injuries on the person of Mst.
Manno:--
(1) A bleeding incised wound 2 c.m. x 2 m.m. x 3 m.m. On the outer side of index finger of right hand in the middle. Direction transverse.
(2) A bleeding incised wound 1 c.m. x 2 m.m. x 3 m.m. At the distal end of palmer surface of ring finger of right hand, transverse in direction.
(3) A bleeding incised wound 8 m.m. x 1 m.m. x 2 m.m. At the tip of right middle finger on the palmer side.
(4) A 'V' shape wound (incised) on the inner side of fore-arm on the left side with the base of 'V' towards elbow. It was 4 c.m. Above the wrist crease. Size 2 c.m. x 3 m.m. x 3 m.m. All these injuries were found to be simple in nature caused by a sharp-edged weapon.
7. Allah Wadhaya, the complainant, appeared as P.W.13 and has endorsed the fact that the appellant killed Mst. Bashiran and injured his wife Mst. Manno, as he intended to take Mst. Bashiran with him, who had resisted his demand. He has proved the F.I.R. Exh.P.M. And has endorsed the fact that Mst. Bashiran died a month later. He has added that Noor Muhammad P.W. Is a married man having four children.
8. Mst. Manno P.W.14 is the injured lady. She has stated that she and her daughter Mst. Bashiran were injured by the appellant, who had insisted to take Mst. Bashiran with him..
9. Noor Muhammad P.W.15 has corroborated the fact that he had seen the appellant giving blows to Mst. Bashiran and Mst. Manno. He had also witnessed the recovery of the blood-stained shirt P.4 and the blood-stained dagger P.5. He lives at a distance of five houses from the house of the complainant and is the brother of the complainant.
10. The appellant, when examined under section 342, of the Cr.P.C. Pleaded to be innocent and appeared as his own witness in defence. He has stated that he went to the house of the complainant on 3-7-1985 at 8-00 a.m. And found Mst. Manno sitting there. He inquired about Mst.
Bashiran and Mst. Manno became nervous and called Mst. Bashiran from inside the room. The appellant has added that Noor Muhammad also came out of the same room and Mst. Bashiran went to the kitchen and he followed her in the kitchen and inquired as to why Noor Muhammad was found inside the room and she said that she had associations with Noor Muhammad and that he was also her husband. According to the appellant, he lost the power of self-control and under the stress of grave and sudden provocation picked up a Chhuri from the kitchen and gave injuries to Mst, Bashiran as well as Mst. Manno. He has explained that Mst. Manno had four sons and two daughters from the complainant.
11. The defence version put forth by the appellant does not ring true because the incident took place at 8-00 a.m. When there was no chance of Mst. Bashiran to indulge in the nefarious act of having illicit connections with Noor Muhammad who otherwise was her uncle. Mst. Manno, who contracted a second marriage after the death of Pir Bakhsh, was not expected to be instrumental in the ugly affair of prostitution of her own daughter. It may also be noted that in that event, the appellant should have followed Noor Muhammad in order to injure him, but no such endeavour was made. In order to save his own skin, the appellant has manufactured a defence, which is just a figment of his imagination and appears to be false.
12. All the ocular witnesses are the natural persons, who were expected to be present at that time.
Their statements are consistent. In the circurnsiantes, the conviction of the appellant under sections 302 and 324 of F' P C. Is unexceptionable. Since the appellant is a poor man, I reduce his Inci awarded under section 302 of the P.P.C. From Rs,10,000 to Rs,2,000 and he shall suffer one year's R.I. In default thereof. The amount of fine under section 324 of the P.P.C. Is also reduced from Rs,1,000 to Rs,200 and in default of the payment of fine, he shall undergo further one month's R.I. The fine, if recovered, shall be paid to Mst.
Manno, as ordered by the learned trial Court. The appeal is decided accordingly.