' KHIZAR HAYAT, J.--- Shah Muhammad alias Manna son of Allah Ditta, aged 25 years, caste Sheikh, resident of Chak No,258/R.B., Police Station Dijkot, District Faisalabad, was tried and convictd by Sessions Judge, Toba Tek Singh, under sections 380 and 302, P.P.C. (five counts), vide judgment, dated 1-3-1986. He was awarded 7 years' rigorous imprisonment under section 380, P.P.C. And sentenced to death and a fine of Rs,1,000 or in default thereof to undergo 1 year's rigorous imprisonment under section 302, P.P.C. On each count. It was further ordered that he shall pay Rs,25,000 as compensation to the heirs of each deceased or in default thereof to undergo simple imprisonment for 6 months. The sentences of imprisonment were directed to run concurrently if death sentence was not confirmed. The convict has filed instant appeal (Criminal Appeal No,571 of 1986) against his convictions and sentences and the trial Court has sent reference (Murder Reference No,62 of 1986) under section 374, Cr.P.C. To this Court for confirmation of death sentence awarded to the appellant. Muhammad Bashir, complainant, and Muhammad Shafi, husband of Mst. Kalsoom (deceased), have filed revision (Criminal Revision No,353 of 1986) praying that the amount of compensation awarded by the trial Court may be enhanced. The three matters are being disposed of by this single judgment.
2. The occurrence took place on the night between 28/29-5-1985 in the house of Sardar (deceased) situated in Suhag Colony, Gojra Town, District Toba Tek Singh, wherein besides Sardar (owner of the house) his daughter Mst. Kalsoom, aged 42 years and her children, namely, Shafiq aged 10 years, Mst. Naureen aged 16 years and Mst. Hafsa aged 13 years, were murdered while asleep.
3. The prosecution story as disclosed at the trial was as follows: Muhammad Shafi (P.W.18) husband of Mst. Kalsoom (deceased) had gone to Saudi Arabia for earning his livelihood. Mst. Kalsoom with her aforementioned three deceased children started living with her father Sardar (deceased). On 29-5-1985, at about 11-30 a.m. Mst. Rehana (P.W.10), a sweepress, went to Sardar's house for cleaning it and found its door chained from outside. She unchained the door, entered the house and saw blood spread in the courtyard. She immediately came out and informed her mother Mst.
Khurshid Bibi (P.W.11) about it who further told it to Muhammad Bashir (P.W.17), a neighbor of the deceased. Muhammad Bashir P.W. Alongwith other Mohalladars, namely, Latif Aslam (P.W.14), Shah Muhammad and Ghulam Rasool P.Ws. Went there and saw that besides sufficient blood lying in the courtyard, two rooms of the house were locked. They broke open the locks and found Sardar lying murdered in one room while Mst. Kalsoom and her three children were lying murdered in the other room. At this Muhammad Bashir P.W. Leaving his companions near the dead bodies went to the Police Station Gojra and lodged report Exh.P.TT, recorded by S.I. Bashir Ahmad (P.W.25).
4. S.I. Bashir Ahmad after recording F I R. Reached the spot. He prepared injury statements and inquest reports and despatched the dead bodies under police escort to the mortuary for post- mortem examination. He secured blood from the Baithak, roof and three places in the courtyard of the house under separate memos. Exhs. P.GG to P.KK. He seized various blood-stained household articles such as cots, shoes, Hooka, Palang (bed), beddings (P.21 to P.32) and the two broken locks (P.33 and P.34) from the spot and secured them under memos. Exhs.P.LL to P.PP.
5. Dr. Muhammad Aslam Javed (P.W.1) conducted post-mortem examination on all the five dead bodies. He noted 4 incised wounds on the dead body of Sardar, mostly in the neck region. Their dimension ranged between 8 c.m. x 2 c.m. To 16 c.m. x 10 c.m. Neck of the deceased was almost separated at the level of larynx resulting in his death. On the dead body of Mst. Kalsoom, there were 9 incised wounds, of which 3 were in the neck region and rest on the right arm. Neck below the chin, with larynx and oesophagus was cut. Her right hand was amputated. Dimension of most of the injuries ranged between 5 c.m. x 2 c.m. To 15 c.m. x 5 c.m. Which resulted in death of the deceased.
Two incised wounds were noted by the doctor on front side of neck of Mst. Naureen (deceased) cutting neck and carotid blood vessels which caused death of the deceased. Solitary incised injury 15 c.m. x 4 c.m. On the neck of Muhammad Shafiq (deceased), cutting oesophagus and larynx and similarly an incised injury 20 c.m. x 7 c.m., cutting neck of Mst. Hafsa (deceased) were noted by the doctor which, according to him, had proved fatal.
6. Saeed Ahmad, Deputy Superintendent of Police (P.W.23) sent for S.I. Muhammad Daud (P.W.7), Fingerprints Expert, and S.I. Rana Muhammad Iqbal (P.W.8), Photographer, from the Finger Print Bureau, Punjab, Lahore, who visited the spot on 2-6-1985. They lifted and photographed the fingerprints in the presence of Resident Magistrate and Deputy Superintendent of Police Saeed Ahmad found on iron-box (P.15), brief-case (P.16), spoon (P.17), glass (P.18) and a Dibia (P.19) lying on the spot and kept them in record of the bureau. These articles were secured under memo.
Exh.P.G.
7. Muhammad Shafi (P.W.18) husband of Mst. Kalsoom (deceased), and father of three deceased children, having learnt about this tragedy returned from Saudi Arabia 5/6 days after the occurrence and on checking his belongings he found his air-gun, camera, bangles of gold and other ornaments and clothings missing and prepared a list of the missing articles.
8. On 30-8-1985 the appellant of his own approached Khadim Hussain (P.W.21) and Falak Sher (P.W.22), councillors of the Ilaqa, and confessed before them to have committed the murder of the five deceased persons and stolen away the articles belonging to the deceased. Narrating the occurrence, he stated that he used to visit deceased's house while Muhammad Shafi was away to Saudi Arabia. Mst. Kalsoom (deceased) promised to marry her daughter Mst. Naureen (deceased) with him. He had been spending more on that family. Mst. Kalsoom (deceased) then asked him to divorce his first wife and then she would marry Mst. Naureen to him. He sent a notice of divorce to his first wife but thereafter Mst. Kalsoom refused to marry Mst. Naureen with him. He then chalked out a plan to murder her entire family. He came to Chak No,258/R.B. After paying a visit to Faisalabad in connection with a case and then came to Gojra at 8/9 p.m. On the night of occurrence. He concealed a Chhura outside the house. He served ice-cream to all the deceased.
At about 11 p.m. He brought the Chhura from outside and placed it under his bed in the Baithak and slept there. Sardar (deceased) slept on the roof while other deceased slept in the courtyard. He further stated that he removed his clothes, excepting vest and underwear. At dead of night he awakened Mst. Naureen and brought her inside the Baithak and asked her to accompany him but she refused whereupon he threw her on the bed (Palang) and slaughtered her with Chhura. He then murdered Muhammad Shafiq, Mst. Hafsa and Mst. Kalsoom in the courtyard and last of all he killed Sardar on the roof. Thereafter, he brought the dead body of Sardar downstairs and placed it in one room and dead bodies of other four deceased were placed in the other room. He then searched the house and having selected some articles put them in an attache-case. Then he took bath, took water from the refrigerator and at morning Azan time he left the house with the attache- case after locking both rooms and chaining outer door of the house. He threw the Chhura in the nearby drain (Nullah). Having made this confessing the appellant requested the P.Ws. To produce him before the police. Khadim Hussain and Falak Sher P.Ws. Then produced him before Muhammad Sharif, Inspector Police (P.W.26) who arrested him.
8. On 2-9-1985, the appellant while in custody led to the recovery of Chhura (P.35) from a Nullah which was secured under memo. Exh.P.QQ attested by Abdul Aziz (P.W.15) and Feloran Masih (P.W.20).
9. On 3-9-1985, the appellant took the police to his shop situate in Chak No,153/Murad, Hasilpur, took out key (P.36) from underneath frame of the door of the shop and with it opened its lock (P.37).
The lock and key were seized under memo. Exh.P.RR. From within the shop air-gun (P.38), plastic bag (P.39) containing different articles such as camera etc. (P.41 to P.43), an attache-case (P.40) containing articles (P.44 to P.57) belonging to the deceased were recovered and taken into possession vide memo. Exh.P.SS attested by Abdul Aziz (P.W.15), Nazar and Arshad P.Ws.
10. On 4-9-1985, the appellant while in custody led to the shop of Muhammad Tufail (P.W.13) in Chistian who produced 8 bangles of gold (P.20/1-8) and also a receipt (Exh.P.DD) purported to have been executed and signed by the appellant on 11-7-1985 in favour of Muhammad Tufail P.W.
The bangles and the receipt were secured under memos. Exhs.P.EE and P.FF respectively.
11. On 2-9-1985, S.I. Muhammad Yasin (P.W.24) obtained prints of fingers of both hands of the appellant on sample papers Exh.P.Y. In presence of Assistant Commissioner, Gojra. Muhammad Sharif, Inspector (P.W.26) sent them to the Finger Print Expert for comparison with the finger prints lifted by S.I. Muhammad Daud (P.W.7) from the spot on 2-6-1985. On 14.9-1985, specimen handwriting (Exhs.P.DDD to P.I'FF) of the appellant was obtained and sent to Handwriting Expert with receipt (Exh.P.DD) for comparison and report. Handwriting Expert's report (Exh.P.GGG) and Finger- Print Bureau's report (Exh.P.BB) are positive.
12. Shirts and Shalwars of Mst. Kalsoom and Mst. Naureen were found stained with blood and semen vide Chemical Examiner's report Exh.P.JJJ. Bloodstained earth collected from the spot and Chhura (P.35) were also found stained with blood vide Chemical Examiner's reports Exhs.P.KKK and P.LLL while Serologist's reports Exhs.P.MMM and P.000 respectively, say that blood on these articles was of human origin.
13. At the trial, the prosecution produced 27 witnesses. There is no eyewitness in the case. The entire evidence brought on record is in the nature of circumstantial evidence summarised below:--
(a) Khadim Hussain (P.W.21) and Falak Sher (P.W.22) stated that the appellant had confessed before them to have killed all the deceased because Mst. Kalsoom (deceased) had refused to marry her daughter Naureen (deceased) with him. He threw Chhura after the occurrence in the nearby drain and took away the belongings of the deceased.
(b) Feloran Masih (P.W.20) and Muhammad Sharif, Inspector Police (P.W.26) stated that blood- stained Chhura (P.35) was recovered from a drain (Nullah) at the pointation of the appellant.
(c) Abdul Aziz (P.W.15) and Muhammad Sharif (P.W.26) stated that the appellant at his pointation got recovered the belongings of the deceased (P.38 to P.57) from his shop in Chak No,153/Murad, Hasilpur after its lock (P37) was opened by the appellant with key (P.36). They also stated about recovery of bangles of gold (P.20/1-8) made at appellant's pointation from Muhammad Tufail P.W.
Of Christian who stated to have purchased the same from the appellant under receipt (Exh.P.DD), dated 11-7-1985, executed by him.
(d) Muhammad Daud (P.W.7) Finger Prints Expert, stated that fmger-prints lifted on 2-6-1985 from articles lying on the spot, tallied with right index finger and left little finger of the appellant respectively, vide report Exh.P.BB. The Handwriting Expert Qamar Ahmad Bhatti (P.W.2) stated that receipt (Exh.P.DD) was in the handwriting of the appellant and also bore his signatures and proved his report Exh.P.GGG.
(e) Dr. Muhammad Aslam Javaid (P.W.1) stated that all the deceased persons died of the injuries caused to them with sharp-edged weapon.
(f) According to Chemical Examiner's report (Exh.P.LLL and that of the Serologist (Exh.P.000), Chhura (P.35) was stained with human blood and according to Chemical Examiner's report (Exh.P.JJJ) the clothes of Mst. Kalsoom and Mst. Naureen (deceased) were found stained both with blood and semen.
(g) Abscondence of appellant from 29-5-1985 to 30-8-1985.
14. The appellant in his statement under section 342, Cr.P.C. Denied to have confessed before Khadim Hussain (P.W.21) and Falak Sher (P.W.22) or to have led to the recovery of incriminating articles. He, however, claimed wrist watch (P.66), currency notes of Rs,950 and identity card as belonging to him which were recovered from his personal search at the time of his alleged arrest on 30-6-1985. He claimed key (P.36) and lock (P37) to be his. He admitted specimen writings (Exhs.P.DDD, P.EEE and P.FFF) obtained from him in the presence of a Magistrate. He also admitted writing and signature on receipt (Exh.P.DD) to be in his handwriting but explained that it was got written from him by the police at Police Station Gojra after his arrest. Further stated that the occurrence was witnessed one and that he had been made a scape-goat. He produced no defence evidence but has himself appeared in disproof of the allegations under section 340(2), Cr.P.C. Wherein he stated on oath that all the deceased belonged to his brotherhood. He was leading happy married life and from 1980 he was running a medical store in Chak No,153/Murad, Hasilpur and prior to it he was in Army Police. He was challenged in a theft case and on 28-5-1985 he attended the Court of Magistrate at Faisalabad in that connection and came to Chak No,258/R.B. Police Station Samundri. On 29-5-1985, he read news about this occurrence and having learnt that he was wanted by the police he was hiding at different places. The police tortured his father and brother. On 25-8-1985, he was sleeping at the Darbar of Baba Roode Shah in Chak No,83. Police Station Thikriwala, from where he was caught by one Master Muhammad Ali as a suspect and was handed over to police. He was then taken to Police Station Gojra where Gojra police involved him in this case. He further stated that actually Shah Mtihammad P.W's son wanted to marry Mst. Naureen (deceased) which was not liked by Shah Muhammad P.W. Who threatened Sardar (deceased) that he should restrain Mst. Naureen otherwise he would punish the whole family. In his cross-examination, he admitted that he did not have personal knowledge about aforesaid threat, etc. He produced two copies of 'daily Imroze' dated 20-8-1985 and 26-8-1985. The last-mentioned newspaper carries news about his arrest.
15. Learned trial Court on consideration of the material on record ignored divorce notice (Exh.P.XX) purported to have been issued by the appellant to his wife as being not formally proved. It also ruled afore-said two newspapers out of consideration because neither the Reporter nor the Editor of the newspaper had appeared to prove relevant news relied upon by the appellant. But believing the extra-judicial confession, corroborated by recovery of deceased's belongings and the blood- stained Chhura from the appellant, it found him guilty of committing theft and murder of five deceased and convicted and sentenced him accordingly as mentioned in para. 1 above, hence this appeal.
16. We have heard learned counsel for the parties at length and perused the record with their assistance.
17. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant has submitted that there is no direct evidence in the case and circumstantial evidence brought on record by the prosecution falls far short of bringing home the charge of murder to the appellant beyond reasonable doubt, hence he deserves to be acquitted. He further submitted that it was not at all probable that the appellant would confess his guilt before Khadim Hussain and Falak Sher P.Ws. With whom he had no acquaintance prior to the occurrence. He emphasized that according to the news published in the Daily Imroze, dated 26-8-1985, the appellant had been arrested before 26-8-1985, therefore, claim of Khadim Hussain and Falak Sher P.Ws. That the appellant confessed his guilt before them on 30- 8-1985 is belied. Further argued that appellant could not singlehandedly kill five persons sleeping at three different places without being detected; and that the incriminating recoveries said to have been effected from him are fake and fabricated. Regarding Handwriting Expert's report (Exh.P.GGG) he submitted that it was procured by fabricating receipt (Exh.P.DD) after arrest of the appellant; and that the presence of semen on the clothes of Mst. Kalsoom and Mst. Nauieen (deceased persons) tells a different story i,e, it suggests that there were more than two assailants who first raped the two ladies and then killed them and their whole family. Learned State counsel assisted by learned counsel for the complainant has defended the impugned judgment.
18. We have carefully considered the contentions of learned counsel for the parties in the light of the proved facts and the relevant law cited at the Bar.
19. It is a case of circumstantial evidence, of which most significant one is the evidence of Finger Prints Expert, S.I. Muhammad Daud (P.W.7) and the Finger Prints Photographer S.I. Rana Muhammad Iqbal (P.W.8). S.I. Muhammad Daud (P.W.7) visited the scene of offence on 2-6-1985 in response to a wireless message and lifted/preserved fingerprints found on the articles (P.15 to P.19) which were lying there. S.I. Rana Muhammad Ibqal (P.W.8) on 8-6-1985 took photographs of impression present on a box and a Daba as instructed by S.I. Muhammad Daud (P.W.7). These finger-prints were kept in record of Finger-Print Bureau. Later on sample paper Exh.P.Y. Of Shah Muhammad, appellant, prepared on 2-9-1985 before a Magistrate was received in the Bureau and S.I.
Muhammad Daud (P.W.7) carried out the comparison. According to him, right index finger impression of the appellant (on Exh.P.Y.) tallied with the finger-impression which was lifted from attache-case (P.16) lying on the spot on 2-6-1985 and the left little finger-impression of the appellant (on Exh.P.Y.) tallied with finger-impression lifted from Dibia (P.19) on 2-6-1985. Points of similarity are mentioned in his detailed report (Exh.P.BB). Needless to say that science of identification of finger-prints is a definite science and it is universally recognized that ridges on fingers of one person do not tally with ridges on fingers of any other person in the world. Therefore, the presence of fingerprints of the appellant on articles (P.15 and P.19) found lying on the spot, furnishes very strong circumstance forming the belief that the appellant ransacked the deceased's house after committing murder of the five deceased persons on the night of occurrence. The appellant states that he was arrested on 25-8-1985 and if it is assumed correct (without conceding) even then Finger Prints Expert's evidence remains undamaged because the fingerprints on articles (P.15 to P.19) were preserved/lifted on 2-6-1985 i,e,, months before his arrest.
20. The second incriminating circumstance against the appellant is his abscondence after commission of the crime. According to prosecution, the appellant remained underground till 30-8- 1985. The appellant himself admits that he remained in hiding from 29-5-1985 to 25-8-1985 till he was caught from the Darbar of Baba Roode Shah in Chak No,83 by one Master Muhammad Ali who handed him over to the police. In his statement recorded under section 340(2), Cr.P.C. The appellant stated on oath that the deceased family belonged to his brotherhood. His sister Mst.
Ghafooran was married to Mushtaq, a cousin of Muhammad Shafi P.W., husband of Mst. Kalsoom (deceased) and that his sister Mst. Ghafooran's Doli was taken to the house of said Muhammad Shafi P.W. So, the appellant is close relation of Muhammad Shafi P.W. Whose wife and children have been murdered. Ordinarily, therefore, after learning about the occurrence, the appellant should have gone to Muhammad Shafi's house for condolence but he did not do so. Rather he hid himself.
It is worth noting that the appellant is not named in the F.I.R., therefore, his admission that after learning about the occurrence on 29-5-1985 he hid himself at different places shows his guilty conscience which constitutes a circumstance establishing his involvement in the commission of this crime.
21. In the circumstances, extra-judicial confession in this case which ordinarily is considered weak evidence, has gained importance. It is sought to be proved through Khadim Hussain and Falak Sher 'F.Ws. Who don't have any illwill or animosity against the appellant. Despite lengthy cross- examination the defense has 'failed to cause a dent in their testimony. Their evidence appears to be convincing and confidence inspiring. It is corroborated on material particulars by appellant's own statement made at the trial on oath and by recovery of various stolen goods of the deceased effected from appellant's own shop in Chak No,153/Murad and also at his potation from Muhammad Tufail (P.W.13) besides the recovery of the weapon of offence. The objection of the learned counsel that it was improbable that the appellant would make confession before Khadim Hussain and Falak Sher P.Ws. Who were not acquainted with him prior to the occurrence, is without force, for, both these witnesses asserted that the appellant was already known to them because of his relationship with Muhammad Shall P.W. Who worked for some time as driver with Khadim Hussain P.W. It is, therefore, quite probable that the appellant had approached them for making confession and being produced before the police in order to avoid rigors of the police interrogation considering them to be influential persons as they were Councillors in those days.
22. Learned counsel has laid much stress on the news item published in the Daily Imroze, dated 26- 8-1985, regarding arrest of the appellant and argued that the prosecution story that the appellant made extra-judicial confession before Khadim Hussain (P.W.21) and Falak Sher (P.W.22) on 30-8- 1985 is falsified because he had been arrested 4/5 days prior to 30-8-1985. Learned trial Court, to our minds, rightly refused to read the said news item in evidence since it had not been formally proved in accordance with law. Furthermore, Master Muhammad Ali whom the appellant had summoned in his defence, was given up when he attended the Court. This means that Muhammad Ali, if produced, would not have supported him.
22-A. Another piece of evidence is the recovery of goods belonging to the deceased and the weapon of offence from the appellant. Articles (P.38 to P.57) owned by the deceased were recovered on 3-9-1985 from the shop of the appellant situated in Chak No,153/Murad. This recovery is proved by S.I. Muhammad Yasin, Muhammad Sharif Inspector of Police and Abdul Aziz P.Ws. It is true that Abdul Aziz (P.W.15) is related to the deceased and resides at Ghaziabad, District Sahiwal, and not at Chak No,153/Murad but his evidence is corroborated by a very strong circumstance, i,e, the appellant admits that he has a shop in Chak No,153/Murad and that the key (P.36) and lock (P.37) belong to him. This omission lends support to the prosecution story that the appellant led the police to his shop in Chak No,153/Murad, took out key (P.36), opened his shop's lock (P.37) with it and got recovered stolen goods (P.38 to P.57) of the deceased from there. Muhammad Tufail P.W., a Goldsmith of Chistian, stated that the appellant sold to him bangles of gold (P.20/1-8) for a sum of Rs,11,700 under receipt (Exh.P.DD) executed by the appellant. He produced the same before the police when the appellant had taken the police to him. According to Handwriting Expert Qamar Ahmad Bhatti (P.W.27) the receipt (Exh.P.DDD) is in the handwriting of the appellant and bears his signatures. Again, bangles P.20/1-8 are identified by Abdul Hameed (P.W.19), a Goldsmith of Gojra, who prepared them on order, placed by Muhammad Shafi P.W. All the aforementioned goods have been identified by Mst. Shahida Parveen (P.W.16) and Muhammad Shafi (P.W.18) and belonging to Mst. Kalsoom deceased. It leads to the inference that following the murder of the deceased these articles had been taken away by the appellant.
23. Next comes, recovery of weapon of offence Chhura (P.35), made at the pointation of the appellant from a drain. It is supported by Feloran Masih (P.W.20) who stated that he cleaned the Nullah at the place pointed out by the appellant with a spade and during the process found Chhura (P.35) stuck in the mud which was seized under memo. Exh.P.QQ. Appellant's counsel objected that it could not possibly be Lund stained with blood on the day of recovery as it remained submerged in water for two months, therefore, it is a concoction. Feloran Masih (P.W.20) is an independent witness. His evidence inspires confidence. According to him, the Nullah is 2-1/2 feet wide and it had been never cleaned. Chhura (P.35) is a heavy weapon which appears to have settled down in the bed of the Nullah and it is just possible that the blood on it was not completely washed away. We are of the view that recovery of Chhura (P.35) from the Nullah, pointed out by the appellant, suggests that it was within his exclusive knowledge that the Chhura was lying there.
Injuries on the persons of the deceased in all probability appear to have been caused with a weapon like Chhura (P.35). Thus, it is reasonable to infer that the appellant used this weapon for committing these murders.
24. The objection that, because clothes of Mst. Kalsoom (deceased) and Mst. Naureen (deceased) were found stained with semen and live persons were murdered at different places in the house, shows that the assailants were more than one who had first committed rape with these ladies and then murdered them alongwith other members of their family is not sound enough to he susceptible of acceptance. Had the ladies been raped forcibly and them killed then their dead bodies would have been found naked and semen would have been found in their private parts also. But it is not so. Semen stains found on their clothes could be old ones. Furthermore, dimensions of injuries on the persons of the deceased are quite extensive which are indicative of the fact that they were done to death while asleep. These murders seem to have been intelligently planned. The appellant is an ex-Army man. He has criminal propensity as he admitted in his statement under section 340(2), Cr.P.C., that he was challaned in theft case and had attended Magistrate's Court at Faisalabad, a day before the occurrence. He deals in medicines. Therefore, it appears that in order to liquidate the whole family he had first administered some stupefying drug to them in the ice-cream or made them inhale something like chloroform during their sleep and then killed them at leisure and placed their dead bodies inside the rooms before he made away with their belongings.
25. On the basis of complete chain of circumstances enumerated above which are, to our minds, incompatible with innocence of the appellant upon any reasonable hypothesis, the learned trial Court has very rightly held the appellant F guilty under sections 380 and 302, P.P.C. The appellant has liquidated the whole family of Muhammad Shafi P.W. In gruesome manner and there being no mitigating circumstance we find that the appellant richly deserved the extreme penalty of death awarded by the learned trial Court. Resultantly, while G maintaining appellant's convictions and sentences, we dismiss his appeal in to, The death sentence awarded to the appellant is hereby