MUHAMMAD MUNIR KHAN, J.--- This Criminal Appeal No.2 of 1988 and the connected Murder Reference No.2 of 1988/BWP. Arise from the judgment of learned Sessions Judge Rahimyar Khan, whereby he on 19-12-198'7 convicted Manzoor Hussain (35) appellant under section 302, P.P.C. For the murder of Mehmood Hassan and sentenced him to death and a fine of Rs.10,000, in default thereof 3 years' R.I. With the direction that the fine if realized shall be paid as compensation to Rasool Bakhsh complainant, father of the deceased.
2. The occurrence took place on 11-7-1985 at 1-00 p.m. In the area of New Sabzimandi, Rahimyar Khan at a distance of 2 k.m. From Police Station City Rahimyar Khan. F.I.R. Exh. P.J. Was lodged by Rasool Bakhsh P.W.11, father of the deceased on the same day at 1-30 p.m. And was recorded by Abdul Rehman's, Inspector P.W.10.
3. The motive allegedly was that about one year before the occurrence, the appellant took Mehmood Hassan deceased with him to Karachi for labour. About one month before the occurrence, the deceased and the accused both came back to their houses. Thereafter, the appellant was compelling the deceased to accompany him to Karachi again. He also wanted to commit unnatural offence to him but the deceased did not agree to it, hence this occurrence.
4. As for the main occurrence, it has been stated that on the eventful day, the deceased was employed at the hotel of Hazoor Bakhsh P.W. Situate near Bus Stand Rahimyar Khan. Rasool Bakhsh complainant went to see him there. He met his son (deceased), sat for a shortwhile with him and then sent him for purchasing cigarette. Thereafter, he heard hue and cry from the side of the gate of Sabzimandi. He rushed to that side. The hue and cry also attracted Zahoor Ahmad P.W., Iqbal Ahmad P.W.8 and Ghulam Haider P.W.12 to the spot. They saw Manzoor Hussain appellant causing injuries with Chhuri to the deceased. They tried to apprehend the accused/appellant but he ran away from there. Zahoor Ahmad and Ghulam Yasin P.W. Chased him and overpowered him, snatched blood-stained Chhuri from him at some distance from the place of occurrence. They brought him back to the place of occurrence. In the meantime, Mehmood Hassan succumbed to the injuries on the spot. Leaving the dead body and the appellant under private arrest on the spot, Rasool Bakhsh left for the police station to lodge the F.I.R.
5. After recording the F.I.R. Muhammad Abdul Rehman's, Inspector, P.W.10 came to the spot. He found the appellant under private arrest of the P.Ws. On the spot. Zahoor Ahmad produced Manzoor Ahmad appellant and blood-stained Chhuri Exh.P.5 before him. He arrested the accused/appellant and took Chhuri Exh.P.5 in possession vide memo. Exh. P.C. Attested by Zahoor Ahmad P.W.7, Ghulam Haider P.W.12. He removed blood-stained turban Exh.P.6 and shirt Exh.P.7 from the person of the appellant and. Took them into possession vide memo. Exh.P.E. Attested by Iqbal Ahmad P.W.8 and Ghulam Haider P.W.12.
6. Dr. Fayyaz Mehmood P.W.9 conducted post-mortem examination on the dead body of Mehmood Hassan on 11-7-1985 at 7-00 a.m. He found following injuries on his person:-- Injuries: (1)A stab wound of about 1" x 1" in horizontal direction below the left nipple going into the chest cavity.
(2)A stab wound of 1-1/2" x 1" in oblique direction about two inches below the left nipple going into the chest cavity.
(3)A stab wound of about 1" x 1/2" x 3/4" in the midline lying vertically in between and below the nipples on the sternum going into the chest cavity.
(4)A stab wound of about 2" x 1" away from right border of the sternum going into the chest cavity.
(5)A stab wound of about 3" x 1-1/2" in oblique direction in the upper part of abdomen just below the central bone of the chest going into the abdomen.
(6)A stab wound of about 1" x 3/4" in oblique direction on left outer side of the chest 2" away from the left nipple going into the chest cavity.
(7)A stab wound 1-1/2" x 3/4" in oblique direction in the upper part of abdomen about 3" above the umblicus going into the abdominal cavity.
(8)A stab wound of about 1" x 1" on the right side of upper abdomen about 2" away from the midline in the vertical direction.
(9)Two bruises on the inner side of right arm above the elbow joint.
(10) An abrasion of about 1-1/2" on the outer and front side of the base of right thumb.
(11) Abrasion in the middle on the back of right middle finger."
7. To prove its case, prosecution produced 12 witnesses. Zahoor Ahmad P.W.7, Iqbal Ahmad P.W.8, Rasool Bakhsh P.W.11 and Ghulam Haider P.W.12 have given the ocular account of the occurrence and supported the version of the main occurrence stated above. They claim to have seen the appellant causing injuries with Chhuri to Mehmood Hassan deceased and having apprehended him (appellant) with blood-stained Chhuri at some distance from the place of occurrence. Rasool Bakhsh P.W.11 has supported the alleged motive. Ghulam Yasin P.W.6 stated that at the time of occurrence he was sitting in his tea-stall near the place of occurrence. He heard the noise from the gate of Sabzimandi and went to that side. He saw the appellant running away with blood-stained Chhurr in his hand followed by 3/4 persons including Zahoor Ahmad P.W. He (P.W.6) and Zahoor Ahmad overpowered the accused/appellant and Zahoor Ahmad snatched Chhuri from him. When the police came to the place of occurrence, the appellant was produced before the police. Zahoor Ahmad, Iqbal Ahmad and Ghulam Haider P.Ws. Had also supported the recovery of blood--stained Chhuri from the appellant and the removal of blood-stained clothes from his person. Dr. Fayyaz Mehmood has proved the post-mortem examination report. The Serologist Report Exh. P.L. Reveals that the Chhuri Exh.P.5 and clothes Exhs.P.6 and P.7 were stained with human blood.
8. When examined under section 342, Cr.P.C. The appellant denied all the incriminating circumstances. He raised the plea of false implication. He denied to have been arrested on the spot. He stated that he was arrested on the next day of the occurrence from Dera Shamas. The complainant was called therefrom and the F.I.R. Was lodged after preliminary investigation. He gave evidence on oath in disproof of the charge against him. He stated that he was innocent. He was falsely, involved in the case by the complainant. He had made application against the complainant at the Police Station Abadpur about one month before the occurrence, so he was annoyed with him. He was arrested on the next day of the occurrence from the Dera Shamas. The complainant was called on the next day of the occurrence and after preliminary investigation, the F.I.R. Was recorded. He did not produce any witness in defence.
9. Believing the prosecution case and evidence produced by it and disbelieving the defence version of false implication, the trial Court has convicted and sentenced the appellant as stated above.
10. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the appellant was innocent; that Rasool Bakhsh was not present on the spot and that he was sent for by the police and on his reaching the police station on the next day, F.I.R. Was registered after preliminary investigation; that the eye- witnesses are not reliable and that since the immediate cause of the murder of the deceased is shrouded in mystery so it is/was not a case of death penalty. Learned counsel for the State has supported the judgment of the trial Court.
11. We have carefully attended to the arguments addressed by the learned counsel for the parties and have reviewed the entire evidence produced by the prosecution, the statements made by the accused/appellant under sections 340(2) and 342, Cr.P.C. And the circumstances appearing in the case. We do not feel persuaded to agree with the learned counsel for the appellant. It is a case of promptly lodged F.I.R. The occurrence took place on 11-7-1978 at-1-00 p.m. And the F.I.R. Was recorded on the same day at 1-30 p.m. There is nothing in evidence to show that the FI.R. Was recorded on the next day of occurrence or it was not recorded at the time and place as it purports.
It is a case of single accused and daylight occurrence. The appellant was arrested at some distance in a hot pursuit by the eye-witnesses and Ghulam Yasin P.W.6. He was carrying blood- stained Chhuri which was snatched from him by Zahoor Ahmad P.W.7. When Muhammad Abdul Rehman's, Inspector, P.W.10 came to the spot, he found the appellant under private arrest. Zahoor Ahmad P.W.7 produced the accused before the police. Blood-stained Chhuri was also produced on the same day before the police. The police had prepared injury statement, inquest report and the recoveries pertaining to the blood-stained Chhuri blood-stained clothes of the appellant, on the day of occurrence. So, the defence version that Rasool Bakhsh P.W. Came to the police station on the next day and the F.I.R. Was recorded on the next day after preliminary investigation is not acceptable. Ghulam Yasin P.W.6, Zahoor Ahmad P.W.7, Iqbal Ahmad P.W.8 and Ghulam Haider P.W.12 are quite independent witnesses. They are neither related to the deceased nor they are inimical' towards the appellant. The statements made by them do not suffer from material contradictions/discrepancies or dishonest improvements.
They have successfully faced the test of cross-examination. The learned counsel has not been able to point out any infirmity warranting the rejection of their statements. Ghulam Yasin runs tea-stall near the place of occurrence. Zahoor Ahmad owns shop in New Sabzimandi Rahimyar Khan just near the place of occurrence. Iqbal Ahmad was bus conductor. The occurrence took place on bus stand. He has givers plausible cause of his presence near the place of occurrence. He stated that after the parking of bus at the bus stand, he had come to tea-stall near the place of occurrence to take tea when he heard the noise and ran to the place of occurrence and saw the appellant inflicting Chhuri blows to Mehmood Hassan. Ghulam Haider P.W.12 was also a bus conductor. He was also going to take tea in the nearby hotel when he heard the noise and was attracted to the place of occurrence. All the eye-witnesses have given the reasonable and plausible cause of their presence near the place of occurrence. We do not see any reason to doubt that they were present and had in fact seen the appellant causing injuries to the deceased. We also do not see any reason to doubt the claim of the prosecution of having apprehended the appellant with blood- stained Chhuri in his hand near the place of occurrence. The appellant has not been able to rebut the prosecution case and its evidence. He has not produced any witness to show that he was arrested on the next day from elsewhere. The trial Court has properly appreciated the evidence.
The submissions made by the learned counsel are devoid of force and substance. For all these reasons, we are convinced that the trial Court has rightly convicted the appellant under section 302, P.P.C. For the murder of Mehmood Hassan.
12. We have considered the question of sentence with utmost care on our part. We do not see any mitigating circumstances in favour of the appellant for lesser penalty. While giving evidence on oath, he could disclose the immediate cause or the circumstances leading to the death of the deceased. The prosecution has stated the motive of the appellant to kill the deceased. Rasool Bakhsh P.W.11 has supported the motive. We do not see any reason to disbelieve him. In these circumstances, it cannot be said that the cause of the murder of the deceased is shrouded in mystery.
Pursuant to the above discussion, there being satisfactory basis to uphold the conviction and sentence of the appellant, the appeal is dismissed and death sentence is confirmed