' JUSTICE RAJA AFRASIAB KHAN (MEMBER).---Mahmoodul Hague alias Mooda son of Muhammad Hanif, Muhammad Saleem and Muhammad Hanif sons of Fazal Din, Ahsanul Hague and Anwarul Hague sons of Muhammad Hanif were convicted and sentenced under sections 302/323/449/109, P.P.C. To various terms of imprisonments by the learned Special Court for Speedy Trial No,II, Lahore, on 16-10-1991. Mahmoodul Hague was sentenced to death under section 302, P.P.C. For having committed the tripple murder of Bashir Ahmad, Mst. Allah Rakhi and Muhammad Ameen, on three counts. He was further sentenced to undergo R.I. For ten years plus a fine of Rs,1,00,000 or in default thereof to undergo R.I. For two years under section 324, P.P.C. He was also sentenced to imprisonment for life plus a fine of Rs,1,00,000 or in default thereof to suffer R.I.For two years under section 449, P.P.C.. His sentences under sections 324 and 449, P.P.C. Were ordered to take effect only in case the death sentences awarded to him were not confirmed by this Court. Muhammad Hanif, Muhammad Saleem, Ahsanul Hague and Anwarul Hague, were sentenced to death as well under section 302/109, P.P.C. For the murder of Bashir Ahmad, Allah Rakhi and Muhammad Ameen.
They were also sentenced to R.I. For ten years each and a fine of Rs,1,00,000 each or in default thereof to suffer further R.I. For two years each under section 324/109, P.P.C. They were sentenced to life imprisonment plus a fine of Rs,.1,00,000 each or in default of payment of fine to undergo R.I. For two years each under sections 449/109, P.P.C. The sentences of these four convicts under section 304/109, P.P.C. And 449/109 P.P.C. Were directed to take effect only in case their death sentences were not confirmed by this Court. Vide the same judgment, the sixth accused Abdul Rashid was acquitted of the charges by the learned trial Court by giving him the benefit of doubt. The convicts challenged their convictions and sentences before this Court by filing Cr.A.No,20/SAC-91 while the State assailed the judgment of acquittal of Abdul Rashid before this Court by filing Cr.A.No,22/SAC- 1991. We propose to dispose of both the matters together by this judgment, as they arise out of the same judgment.
2. The facts, in brief, are that Mushtaq Ahmad son of Ilam Din (first informant) is a resident of Chak No,67/RB. He is a labourer. About two days ago, Mushtaq Ahmad and his brother Muhammad Azam went to the house of their paternal aunt, Mst. Allah Rakhi (deceased) wife of Bashir Ahmad in Chak No,385/GB to stay with her for some days. On 13-10-1990, they were sitting in the house of Mst. Allah Rakhi when they heard an announcement made on a loudspeaker from a mosque of the village saying that the Halqa Patwari had come and was sitting in the Drawing Room of the house of Khushi Muhammad Wattoo and that any landowner of the village who was interested in the correction of his Khasra Girdawari might contact him. On receipt of the information, Bashir Ahmad (deceased) intended to contact said Patwari and accordingly left his house to meet him. Mushtaq Ahmad and his brother Muhammad Azam also followed Bashir Ahmad on the request of Mst. Allah Rakhi as a precautionery measure. At about 11-00 a.m., Bashir Ahmad when reached near the Chowk of Jamia Masjid, from the opposite side, Mahmoodul Haque alias Mooda, the appellant, armed with a rifle emerged and shouted that he had come to teach him a lesson for taking away his agricultural land. He fired 3 shots in quick succession upon Bashir Ahmad which hit him on his abdomen and other vital parts of his body. He fell down and died on the spot. Mahmoodul Haq, thereafter ran towards the house of Bashir Ahmad. Mushtaq Ahmad and his brother Muhammad Azam also ran behind him. On seeing Mst. Allah Rakhi, Mahmoodul Haque fired which hit her abdomen and shoulder. She fell down and died on the spot on account of her injury. In the meantime, Mst. Mumtaz daughter of Bashir Ahmad came out of her house, whereupon the appellant also fired at her but it luckily missed. She returned and went inside the house to save her life. Mst.Mumtaz entered into a Pakka room of her house and bolted it from inside. After committing the second murder, Mahmoodul Haque re-loaded his rifle and ran towards the house of Wall Muhammad, Headman of the village. Muhammad Mushtaq and Muhammad Azam P.Ws.
Continued raising an alarm and chasing the appellant. On reaching near the dirty water pond of the village, he saw Muhammad Ameen son of Wali Muhammad while coming from his house towards him. Mahmoodul Haque again shouted that he was there to teach him a lesson for lending support to Bashir Ahmad etc., in the litigation of his agricultural land.
' He fired which hit Muhammad Amecn on his left arm. He fired a second shot which hit him on his chest.
' On receipt of the injuries, he fell down and died on the spot. On the challenge of Muhammad Mushtaq, Muhammad Azam and Muhammad Afzal, the appellant ran away from the spot with his weapon. The offences were committed by the appellant on the instigation and abetment of Muhammad Hanif, Muhammad Saleem sons of Fazal Din, Ahsanul Haque, Anwarul Haque sons of Muhammad Hanif and Abdul Rashid son of Ghulam Muhammad. On 13-10-1990, Muhammad Nawaz son of Wali Muhammad disclosed to the first informant that on 29-9-1990 at about Ishsa time, he and Muhammad Jameel were passing through the street in front of the house of appellant and that a window of his Drawing Room was open and the .Insiders were visible to them. In the light of a Bulb, the aforesaid witnesses saw Abdul Rashid, Muhammad Hanif, Muhammad Saleem, Ahsanul Haque and Anwarul Haque, sitting together while talking and cospiring with one another with a view to commit offences. The accused were instigating Mahmoodul Haque to wipe out Bashir Ahmad and his family members with a view to get the entire agricultural land from them.
' Motive was that Bashir Ahmad (deceased) and the accused had been litigating for the last about ten years over a piece of agricultural land about 11 acres in Civil Courts. A suit between the parties was pending adjudication before the Civil Court at Faisalabad in which the next date was 14-10- 1990 for its hearing. In the said civil suit, Muhammad Ameen (deceased) used to give support to Bashir Ahmad (deceased) against the accused party. The accused party had given their share of the land on Batai to a local tenant. Bashir Ahmad (deceased) declared openly that he would himself take the owner's share of produce of the land whereupon the accused party made a reply by saying that he would be able to get the produce of land provided he and the members of his family were allowed to remain alive. On account of this grudge, Mahmoodul Haque on the instigation and abetment of the remaining accused murdered Bashir Ahmad, his wife Mst. Allah Rakhi and Muhammad Ameen, one after the other in a brutal manner. An attempt to murder Mst.
Mumtaz was also made by the accused but she luckily had a narrow escape in the attack.
Muhammad Azam, Muhammad Afzal and Muhammad Jameel were left behind to guard the dead bodies on the spot while Mushtaq Ahmad went to give information to the police station. On statement Exh.P.A. Of Mushtaq Ahmed, formal F.I.R. Exh.PA./1 was registered by Khalid Hussain Head Constable No,2173 on 13-10-1990 at 1-40 p.m.
3. Nazir Ahmad Inspector P.W.14 was present at 3-Pulli on 13-10-1990 in connection with his patrol duty. The complainant Mushtaq Ahmad approached him at about 1-00 p.m. For registration of a case against the accused. Injury statement Exh.P.R., Inquest Report Exh.P.S., of Bashir Ahmad (deceasd), Injury statement Exh.P.T. And Inquest Report Exh.P.U. Of Mst. Allah Rakhi (deceased) and Injury statement Exh.P.V. And Inquest Report Exh.P.X. Of Muhammad Ameen (deceased) were prepared by the Police Officer. The dead bodies were sent for Post-Mortem Examination under the escort of Ghulam Sarwar F.C. To mortuary. The Investigating Officer visited the spot. Bloodstained earth from the places of murder of the three deceased was collected and was sealed into three separate parcels vide memos. Exh.P.J. Exh.P.K. And Exh.P.L., respectively. The said memos. Were attested by Muhammad Afzal and Muhammad Azam P.Ws. Two empties Exh.P.9/1-2 from near the place of murder of Bashir Ahmad were recovered and were taken into possession vide memo.
Exh.P.M. Another empty Exh.P.10 was taken into possession from the place where Mst. Allah Rakhi was done to death. It was secured into a sealed parcel vide memo. Exh.P.N. One live bullet P.11 from near the dead body of Mst. Allah Rakhi was taken into possession vide memo. Exh.P.Q. Ghulam Sarwar Constable produced blood-stained clothes Exh.P.1 to P.7 and a sealed phial P.8 which were taken into possession vide memo. Exh. P.F. On 14-10-1990, Muhammad Hanif, Muhammad Saleem and Anwarul Haque were formally arrested from District Jail, Faisalabad where they were lodged in connection with cases vide F.I.Rs, Nos.372, 373 and 396, registered against them with Police Station Batala Colony, Faisalabad, in lieu of recovery of illicit arms from them. The complainant produced copies of the F.I.Rs,, aforesaid, which were taken into possession by the Police Officer vide memo.
Exh.P.B. The memo. Was attested by Muhammad Azam and Muhammad Afzal P.Ws. Ahsan-ul- Haque was arrested on 14-10-1990 from the Sessions Court where he was posted to guard the premises of the Session Courts. Aurangzcb Draftsman prepared the site plans Exh.P.H. And Exh.P.H./1, on the instructions of the Investigating Officer. Abdul Rashid was arrested by the Police Officer on 26-10-1991. Mahmoodul Haque absconded and in this connection an application Exh.P.Y. For the issuance of non-bailable warrants to arrest him was moved. In consequence, warrants of arrest of Mahmoodul Haque were obtained by the Investigating Officer. Ghulam Sarwar Constable was deputed to effect his arrest on the,basis of the aforesaid warrants. Another application Exh.P.Y/1 for issuance of proclamation was also moved. An incomplete challan was submitted in Court for trial of the accused. Muhammad Asghar Inspector P.W.7 arrested Mahmoodul Haque from Pulli Warraichan on 3-4-1991. At the time of his arrest, Mahmoodul Haque was armed with a rifle and 5 cartridges. The rifle and the bullets were taken into possession vide memo. Exh.P.D.
' Positive report of the Chemical Examiner Exh. P.Z. Dated 30-10-1990 and that of the Serologist Exh.
P.A.A. Dated 30-10-1990 were tendered in evidence. It was opined by the Serologist that articles Nos.
34/88/1, 34/88/2 and 34/88/3 (pieces of earth) were stained with human blood.
4. Dr. Muhammad Nawaz Chaudhry, Medical Officer P.W.2 conducted the Post-Mortem Examination upon the dead bodies of Muhammad Ameen, Bashir Ahmad and Mst. Allah Rakhi on 14-10-1991 at different times. He found the following injuries on the person of Muhammad Ameen:-
(1) A fire-arm wound of entry 4 cm x 3 cm into the chest cavity deep upon the outer side of right chest. Its margins were black, scorched and everted.
(2) The wound was continuous with wound of exit 5 cm x 4 cm into the chest cavity deep upon the left chest close to left mammary gland. Its margins were neither black nor scorched or everted.
Underline the fourth rib was fractured.
(3) Lacerated wound 5 cm x 4 cm depth not probed upon the front and inner side of left upper arm in the middle 1/3 part. A bullet was abstracted from the wound. Its margins were everted neither black nor scorched. Fourth rib was fractured under the injury No,1. Pleura injured under the injury No,1. Right lung was perforated under the injury No,1. Pleural cavity was full of liquid blood. Left lung was also perforated under injury No,1. Pleural cavity was full of blood.
' In the opinion of the Doctor, the injuries were inflicted by a fire-arm and were ante-mortem. Injury No,1 was found grievous. Death, in the opinion of the Doctor, occurred due to shock and haemorrhage, as a result of an injury to lungs and heart which was sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. One bullet was recovered from the body and it was kept in the phial which was handed over to the police along with the post-mortem report and clothes of the deceased. Time between injury and death was immediate while between death and post-mortem was 18 to 24 hours.
' The following injuries were found on the dead body of Bashir Ahmad:-
(1) A fire-arm wound of entry 3/4 cm x 3/4 cm upon the right side of abdomen 6 cm from umblicus.
Its margins were everted and was continuous with the wound of exit 2 cm x 1/2 cm into abdominal cavity deep on the left side of upper part of abdomen. Its margins were everted, neither black nor scorched.
(2) A fire-arm wound of entry 3/4 cm x 3/4 cm into abdominal cavity deep at midline of abdomen and was continuous with the wound of exit 1 cm x 3/4 cm on the back side of right side of chest.
Margins were everted.
' Thorax: Right lung injured under the injury No,2. Blood vessels were injured under the injury Nos.1 and 2. Walls of abdomen injured under the injuries. Peritoneum was also injured under injury No,1.
Diaphragm was also injured under injury No,2. Stomach perforated.
' Stomach pancreas and small intestine was perforated under injury No,2. Large intestine was also perforated.
' In the opinion of the Doctor, injuries Nos.1 and 2 were grievous and were caused by a fire-arm. The injuries were ante-mortem. Death occurred due to shock and haemorrhage as a result of injuries Nos.1 and 2 which were sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature. Time between injuries and death was immediate while between death and post-mortem was 18 to 24 hours.
' The Doctor found the following injuries on the dead body of Mst. Allah Rakhi:--
(1) A fire-arm wound of entry 2 cm x 2 cm into abdominal cavity deep on the front of upper side of abdominal cavity. Its margins were everted, black and scorched. This wound was continuous with the wound of exit 5 cm x 3 cm on the back side of abdomen. Its margins were everted neither black nor scorched.
' Thorax: Blood vessels injured under the injury No,1. Walls of abdomen were injured under the injury No,l. Peritonium was also injured under injury No,l. Stomach was perforated, small intestine and large intestine were perforated under injury No,1. Blader contained 100 cc of urine.
' Injury No,1 was grievous and was opined to have been inflicted by a fire-arm. Said injury was ante- mortem. Death was caused due to shock and haemorrhage as a result of the aforesaid injury. The injury was sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. Time between injury and death was immediate and between death and post-mortem was 18 to 24 hours.
5. Eye-witness account was furnished by Mushtaq Ahmad P.W.1, Mst.Mumtaz Bibi P.W.8 and Muhammad Afzal P.W.9. Muhammad Jameel P.W.10 and Muhammad Anwar P.W.11 were the witnesses who deposed about the conspiracy and abetment in the commission of the offences.
6. Mahmoodul Haque, appellant, denied the allegations levelled against him in his statement under section 342, Cr.P.C. He took the plea that he was not present in the village on the day of occurrence and had gone to Karachi in connection with his employment. He further stated that he never absconded and that he voluntarily appeared before the Police when he came to know about the case having been registered against him. However, no statement was made by the appellant on oath under section 340(2), Cr.P.C. Muhammad Saleem, appellant, in his statement under section 342, Cr.P.C. Took the plea that he went to village Ammipur to recover some money from there. He also stated that he was carrying a licensed gun of his brother at that time. He disclosed that he was arrested by the Police at Bus Stand Jhaal Khanawana as he had no licence of the gun. His nephew Anwarul Haque was also arrested alongwith him under the same charge. He stated that plea was taken by him before the police that the gun recovered from him was a licensed one and that his brother was holder of the said licence. A request was made that an opportunity might be given to him to show the licence of his brother Muhammad Hanif but the police did not allow him to do so. Muhammad Hanif appellant in his statement under section 342, Cr.P.C. Deposed that he had gone out of the village in order to bring his daughter-in-law, and that his brother Muhammad Saleem and his son Anwarul Haque were also away from the village to village Bungalow Ammipur with a view to recover some money from that village. He disclosed that Muhammad Saleem, his brother was carrying his licensed gun and that the police arrested him because he was found not in possession of licence of the weapon. To the same effect were the statements made by Ahsanul Haque and Anwarul Haque, appellants. Ahsanul Haque, appellant, deposed that he had been falsely implicated in the case so that he might not be able to pursue the case against his brothers and father. However, no evidence in defence was led by the appellants. Similarly, Abdul Rashid, acquitted co-accused, in his statement under section 342, Cr.P.C. Denied the allegations levelled against him. His plea was that Bashir Ahmad, deceased, had a dispute with his co-accused and that he was their supporter in the said litigation. He disclosed that Afzal and Nawaz P.Ws. Were involved in a case of abduction and that his brother Maqsood Ahmad appeared as a witness against them. He stated that on account of this grudge, he had falsely been implicated in the case by the complainant party.
6-A. The learned trial Judge while believing the ocular account in its entirety convicted and sentenced the appellants as already mentioned above.
7. Mr. Muhammad Munir Khan, learned counsel for the appellants, at the very outset, submits that the prosecution has miserably failed to prove its case against the appellants. He states that there is no sufficient evidence on record to justify the conviction and sentence of the appellants. The learned counsel did not substantially argue the case of Mahmoodul Haque, the principal accused in the case. He maintains forcefully that there is not an iota of evidence available on record regarding the alleged conspiracy hatched by Muhammad Saleem, Muhammad Hanif, Anwarul Haque, Ahsanul Haque and Abdul Rashid while sitting in the Drawing Room of Mahmoodul Haque, to commit various offences, mentioned above. Similarly, he says that no evidence was led in respect of arrest of Anwarul Haque, Muhammad Saleem and Muhammad Hanif under the Arms Ordinance with a view to avoid the criminal liability on their part in fake criminal cases registered against them at the behest of accused Ahsanul Haque who happened to be a policeman as mentioned above. In support of his contention, the learned counsel has taken us through the evidence of Muhammad Jameel P.W.10 and Muhammad Anwar P.W.11, the witnesses in the charges of abetment and conspiracy.
8. Mr. Arshad Mubeen Anwari, learned counsel for Mahmoodul Haque, appellant, contends with vehemence, that there was no evidence produced by the prosecution against him from the village itself where the occurrence took place. He states with vehemence that it was a day time occurrence and that the villagers were present at that time to witness the incident. According to the learned counsel, non-production of such independent and impartial witnesses would seriously affect the truthfulness of the case of the prosecution. He says that on the basis of evidence of interested witnesses alone, the appellant cannot at all be convicted and sentenced in this murder case. Learned counsel for the complainant argues that the prosecution was able to prove its case against the appellants and the acquitted co-accused and that the charges of conspiracy and abetment were also proved against them beyond reasonable doubt. He maintains that there is no legal justification to discard the evidence of Muhammad Jameel P.W.10 and Muhammad Anwar P.W.11 and other circumstantial evidence. He adds that Bashir Ahmad, Mst. Allah Rakhi and Muhammad Ameen were done to death as a result of a deep-rooted conspiracy and that Mahmoodul Haque appellant alone could not commit these murders unless and until he was supported by the conspirators and abettors in the commission of the crime. According to him, keeping in view the magnitude of the offences committed in the case, the participation of the remaining accused was established beyond doubt. The learned State Counsel supported the conviction and sentence of the appellants by adopting the reasons of the learned trial Judge in that behalf.
9. We have heard learned counsel for the parties at considerable length and have read the whole record with their assistance with utmost care. We hold that the prosecution did not succeed in proving its case against Muhammad Saleem, Muhammad Hanif, Ahsanual Haque and Anwarul Haque, appellants beyond reasonable doubt. The whole evidence against these appellants was furnished by Muhammad Jameel P.W.10 and Muhammad Anwar P.W.11. The evidence deposed by these witnesses does not at all inspire confidence inasmuch as we are not prepared to believe that these appellants would sit in a Drawing Room of the appellant Mahrnoodul Haque and talk together so loudly so as to enable Muhammad Jameel and Muhamamd Anwar P.Ws. To overhear them about the conspiracy regarding the murder of Bashir Ahmad and his family mambers. Their evidence is highly vague and shaky. It cannot at all be relied upon in this case. Muhammad Jameel P.W.10 deposed that Muhammad Ameen (deceased) had installed a grinding machine in the village and that he took his wheat for grinding to the said machine. He stated that he brought the wheat early in the morning and that he was told to take away the flour in the evening. He mentioned that he went to the grinding machine at about Isha-time in order to take back his flour from the grinding machine. On reaching near the house of Muhammad Hanif, he overheard conversation of the accused. He added that he saw Muhammad Hanif, Muhammad Saleem, Ahsanul Haque and Anwarul Haque along with Mahmoodul Haque and Abdul Rashid sitting together. He deposed that Ahsanul Haque was asking Mahmoodul Haque that he would make arrangements for Muhammad Saleem, Anwar and Hanif on the next day for their safety and protection and that he would not take any steps in that behalf till he returned home on the next day. He further instigated Mahmoodul Haque to wipe out the entire family of Bashir Ahmad and his supporters with a view to end the dispute once for all. Muhammad Jameel and Muhammad Nawaz left that place and on the next morning Bashir Ahmad (deceased) was given an information about the said conspiracy. Admittedly, no information about the alleged conspiracy to commit crime was given to the police by the witness. However, he did not take any notice of the conspiracy hatched against him by the accused. The evidence further shows that it was Ahsanul Haque alone who instigated the principal accused to commit the offences while the remaining accused kept mum in the meeting. The witness stated that he was prosecuted in a case of an attempt to murder.
Muhammad Jameel conceded that he instituted a cimplaint in which the appellant Muhammad Hanif appeared as a defence witness against him. He frankly admitted that he appeared as a witness against the appellants and in favour of Bashir Ahmad (deceased) in the civil litigation between the parties regarding the agricultural land stated above. On the face of it, the witness appears to be interested and inimical towards the appellants. It is really very difficult to believe such a witness in a murder case. Muhammad Anwar P.W.11 likewise, deposed that on 30-9-1990 he and his friend Muhammad Asif were coming from Samundri in a Bus. When the said Bus reached the spot of 3-Pulli, three persons, namely, Salcem, Ahsan and Anwar also boarded the Bus. He deposed that he knew the three persons previously. He had been going to Chak No,385 in. The company of Mushtaq Ahmad, complainant. He added that one of the three accused was carrying a .12 bore gun with him and that the three accused occupied a seat in front of his seat. Saleem and Anwar told Ahsan within his hearing that Mahmoodul Haque should not take any step till a complete arrangement was made in that behalf. Muhammad Anwar in his evidence conceded that he knew Mushtaq Ahmad complainant for the last 4/5 years and that he was related to him.
He also deposed that Mushtaq Ahmad was married with his sister. His evidence is, therefore, highly interested and is certainly not worth reliance. The evidence deposed by him is vague and confused. It does not convey the commission of any offence at all under the given circumstances.
We believe that he gave evidence in the case because of his relationship with Mushtaq Ahmad, complainant. We are convinced to hold that the evidence regarding conspiracy and abetment was created with a design to implicate all the members of the family of Mahmoodul Haque. This being so, we proceed to discard the evidence of the prosecution on conspiracy and abetment.
Similarly, no evidence was led by the prosecution to show that the cases under the Arms Ordinance of 1965 were fabricated at the instance of Ahsanul Haque Constable in connivance with the Police of Police Station Peoples Colony, Faisalabad, to create evidence favourable to them. For complete lack of evidence, on the controversy, it is difficult to hold that the abovesaid four appellants went to jail in an arranged affair. In consequence, we are persuaded to hold that the prosecution did not succeed in bringing home the guilt against these appellants beyond reasonable doubt.It is always very easy to level a charge of conspiracy and abetment but at the same time it is very difficult to prove it to the satisfaction of the Court. To our satisfaction, there is not sufficient direct or circumstantial evidence available on record to record conviction on the charge of conspiracy against the appellants. In our view there is a doubt about their participation in the commission of the crime. The charge of abetment and conspiracy to commit offences does not stand proved against appellants beyond reasonable doubt. By giving them the benefit of doubt, we proceed to acquit Muhammad Saleem, Muhammad Hanif, Ahsanul Haque and Anwarul Haque, appellants. They shall be released forthwith provided of course they are not required in any other criminal case. The appeal to their extent succeeds and is hereby allowed.
10. So far as the appellant Mahmoodul Haque is concerned, there is overwhelming evidence against him about his participation in the commission of the crime. It is proved that he was armed with a rifle. The evidence of Mushtaq Ahmad P.W.1, Mst. Mumtaz Bibi P.W.8 and Muhammad Afzal P.W.9 demonstrates beyond any shadow of doubt that he while armed with fire-arm committed the murder of Bashir Ahmad, Mst. Allah Rakhi and Muhammad Ameen. There was a protracted civil litigation going on between him and the deceased Bashir Ahmad in respect of a piece of agricultural land. The civil case was pending adjudication before the learned District Judge, Faisalabad and the date of hearing fixed in the case was 14-10-1990, a day later than the day of occurrence. Mushtaq Ahmad, Mst. Mumtaz Bibi and Muhammad Afzal P.Ws. Do implicate the appellant in the murder charge. They uanimously deposed that it was Mahmoodul Haque appellant who committed the murder of Bashir Ahmad, Mst. Allah Rakhi and Muhammad Ameen.
The eye-witnesses appear to be truthful on the face of record. They supported the prosecution version from the very beginning to the end. The objection that no other villager was produced in support of the case is not acceptable to us in a case like this. The evidence of these witnesses was natural and convincing. We, therefore, repel the argument of the learned counsel. The motive part of the prosecution story, the medical evidence and the ocular account definitely lend support to the prosecution version in a big way. This being so, there is no alternative but to accept the prosecution version in this case. The case against the appellant Mahmoodul Haque has been proved beyond any shadow of doubt. He has committed the gruesome murder of Bashir Ahmad, Mst. Allah Rakhi and Muhammad Ameen with a view to forcibly grab 11 acres of agricultural land of the deceased regarding which the litigation was already pending adjudication between the parties. It is obvious that Mahmoodul Haque appellant took the law into his own hands by finishing the three deceased, named above to end the dispute finally. He therefore, deserves no leniency whatsoever. His appeal is accordingly dismissed. The conviction and sentences awarded to him are hereby maintained.
11. There is not an iota of evidence produced by the prosecution to connect Abdul Rashid acquitted co-accused with the commission of the crime. Nothing substantial could be said by learned State Counsel in support of the appeal against acquittal of Abdul Rashid. In our view, he was rightly acquitted by the learned trial Court by giving him the benefit of doubt. There is, thus, no force in the State appeal which is dismissed.