SHAFIUR RAHMAN, J: -Ghulam Haider (aged 27 years) and Muhammad Afzal (aged 22 years) seek leave to appeal against their conviction and sentence under section 302/34, P.P.C. And the sentence of death awarded to them. On account of general amnesty, the sentence of death stands commuted to life imprisonment.
2. The prosecution case against the two convicts was that they had approached in January, 1986, Ghulam Oadir deceased -- the maternal uncle of Ghulam Haider appellant for the hand of Mst.
Faiz Mai -- daughter of Ghulam Qadir. The deceased had not only refused the hand but had insulted them and had turned them out of the house. This happened in the presence of Ghulam Nabi P.W. 6--the brother of Ghulam Oadir. The petitioners felt aggrieved over it. On the 26th of January, 1986 at about 7.00 p.m., when Ghulam Nabi--P.W. 6 and Abdul Aziz P.W. 7 were watering their field, they heard alarm. They rushed to the scene and found the two petitioners causing injuries with their hatchets to the deceased who died on the spot after receiving fifteen incised wounds and one abrasion. The petitioners were arrested. Their clothes were found to be blood-- stained with human blood. They led to recovery of blood-stained hatchet also. The trial Court and the High Court believed the motive, the ocular evidence and held the prosecution case proved, and sentenced the two petitioners to death and the sentence was confirmed by the High Court. While confirming the death sentence of the two petitioners, the High .Court observed as hereunder:-- "The learned counsel for the appellants has not challenged the conviction of the appellants under section 302/34, P.P.C. He requested for reduction in sentence on the grounds that it was not known as to who had caused the fatal injury to the deceased and that the deceased had not only refused to give hand of his daughter to Ghulam Haider who was closely related' to him but had also turned them out of his house disgracefully."
3. In spite of such concession, the learned Judges in the High Court examined the evidence and confirmed the conclusions drawn by the trial Court from it.
4. Mr. Muhammad Ikram Chaudhry, Advocate, the learned counsel for the petitioners has taken us through the evidence in order to establish that during the winter month of January it would have been dark at 7.00 p.m. And the occurrence would have taken only a minute to conclude and the eye-witnesses could not have reached the spot and witnessed it. As regards the false implication, the learned counsel has advanced the plea taken up by the petitioners that it was on account of party faction that they had been implicated. He has also referred to the statement of Abdul Aziz (P.W.7) to contend that the movement of the deceased throughout that day was somewhat suspicious as he had gone out of the house at 7.00 a.m. And his whereabouts were not known till the occurrence took place. Finally it has been contended that the deceased had received an abrasion over knee joint which was covered with sand. All these factors, according to the learned counsel made the prosecution case suspicious.
5. In the case before us the most striking feature is that the deceased and the petitioners happened to be very closely related. The sister of Muhammad Afzal petitioner was married to Ghulam Oadir deceased. Ghulam Haider petitioner is sister's son of Ghulam Qadir deceased.
Ghulam Nabi (P.W.6) is the' brother of Ghulam Qadir deceased. Abdul Aziz (F W.7) is the son of Ghulam Qadir deceased. There was no bazk ground of enmity or ill-will, except for the event advanced by the prosecution as motive for the occurrence. Ordinarily in such close relationship parties, affiliations do not intervene to come to such hatred as to prompt false implication.
6. A large number of incised wounds caused on the deceased indicate that it was caused by more than one person and the implication of two is consistent with the medical evidence and the number of injuries fourd. It would have also taken some time to inflict these injuries where the victim must have attempted to avoid the blows. Especially at the initial stages. For this reason, the two witnesses made it clear that when they reached, the place of occurrence, the deceased was on the ground and was being given repeated blows by. These two persons/petitioners. They could run and reach the vicinity after alarm, so as to witness a part of the occurrence.
7. The recoveries have been effected too soon after their arrest and their arrest has also taken place the very next day of the occurrence. The evidence led at the trial has been fully appraised and believed by the two Courts. In the circumstances, no case is made out against the conviction.
As regards the sentence, we find that already it stands converted into life imprisonment by general amnesty, hence on that account too, no interference is called for. Leave to I appeal is therefore refused.