1. WALI MU14AMMAD KHAN, J: --Mukhtar, Nawaz, Muhammad Afzal, Mumtaz alias Taja and Muhammad Aslam sons of Hassan Muhammad, residents of Chak No. 120/10-R, Tehsil and District Khanewal, appellants herein, have called in question the order dated 23-1-1989, passed by the Lahore High Court, whereby the appeal filed by them against their conviction and sentences under section 302, P.P.C. For causing the death of Abdul Aziz deceased and under various other sections of the law as described in the judgment of the trial Court, was dismissed.
2. Leave granting order is to the following effect:-- "In support of this petition it is stated that Muhammad Ramzan and Karim Bakhsh were not only related but were inimical witnesses as they were involved in a previous criminal litigation between the parties. In 1975 both these witnesses were prosecuted for the murder of the mother of Aslam petitioner and Karim Bakhsh was on conviction sentenced to life imprisonment. Muhammad Ramzan P.W. Was also prosecuted for the murder of a cousin of Ramzan accused. The High Court and the Additional Sessions Judge did not regard their testimony of a quality upon which implicit faith could be placed so much so that they acquitted as many as seven persons involved by them in the occurrence. It was, therefore, entirely unsafe to rely on `their testimony without independent corroboration. As none was available, the petitioners should not have been convicted.
3. The contention raised in support of this petition needs examination. Leave to appeal is granted The facts of the case, briefly stated, are that on the day of occurrence on 1-9-1989 at sunrise time Sultan complainant P.W. 10 along with his brothers Pehlwan (given up) and Ramzan P.W. 12, his cousin Karim Bakhsh P.W. 11, Rahim Bakhsh and Muhammad Bakhsh (both given up) and Abdul Aziz deceased were going to Khanewal to attend the Court in a criminal case under sections 307, 326, 148 and 149, P.P.C. Between the parties. They were proceeding on bicycles and when they reached southern bank of Rajbah 10-R near Bhaini Chak Kakkianwala in the area of Chak No. 120/10-R, the appellants along with their co-accused, ten in number, emerged from a Jawar field. Muhammad Aslam appellant raised a Lalkara that the deceased and his companions would not be spared, upon which the complainant party got down from their cycles. Muhammad Alsam and Mumtaz appellants fired at the deceased hitting him on his legs; Rahim Bakhsh fired at Karim Bakhsh P.W. 11; Muhammad Nawaz, Mukhtar alias Kalu and Afzal alias Annu gave hatchet blows to Abdul Aziz deceased, hitting and injuring him on his head, right eye and right upper arm, respectively; Ikram accused delivered hatchet blow on the head of Karim Bakhsh P.W. 11; Rahim Bakhsh suffered a hatchet blow on his head at the hand of Karim Bakhsh accused. The deceased and the injured fell down on the ground while Muhammad Bakhsh and Muhammad Ramzan. Started running and were chased by Ramzan accused who gave Sota blows to Muhammad Bakhsh. Elahi Bakhsh, Karim Bakhsh, Muhammad Nawaz and Mumtaz son of Rehmat also chased Ranizan P.W. And injured him in a sugarcane field. He was brought back to the spot and thereafter all the accused dragged Abdul Aziz, Pehlawan, Karim Bakhsh and Rahim Bakhsh to the tubewell of Aslam Malhi, where all the accused caused more injuries to the victims with their respective weapons. In the meantime, Rafiq Ahmad and Rehmat also reached the spot. Sultan P.W. Started for the police station and en route came to know about the presence of S.H.O. In Chak No. 136/10-R where he reported the occurrence to him vide statement Ex.PAA, on the basis of which f ormal F.I.R. Exh. PAA/1 was recorded at Police Station, Jehanian at 8-55 a.m.
4. After usual investigation, challan was submitted to the Ilaqa Magistrate, who, in his turn, sent up the accused for trial before the Court of Session. Charge-sheet was framed against the appellants and their co-accused, total numbering fifteen, to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. After recording the evidence produced by the prosecution, the statements of the accused under section 342, Cr.P.C. And hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the-'learned Additional Sessions Judge, Multan, vide judgment dated 1-3-1986, convicted the appellants under section 302, P.P.C. And sentenced them to imprisonment for life and a fine of Rs. 5,000 each or to further 5 months, R.I. And directed to pay an additional amount of Rs.5,000 each under section 544-A Cr.P.C. As compensation to the heirs of Mr. Abdul Aziz deceased onto undergo further 5 months' R.I. Each. They were also convicted under section 148, P.P.C. For which Aslam accused was sentenced to two years'
5. R.I. Nawaz son of Hassan Muhammad was also convicted under sectoin 325, P.P.C. For causing injuries to Karim Bakhsh and Ramzan P.Ws. And sentenced to six months' R.I. And a fine of Rs.2,000 plus payment of Rs.2,000 as compensation each to Karim Bakhsh and Ramzan P.Ws. Or to further two months R.I. Mukhtar accused was further convicted under section 325, P.P.C. And sentenced to six months' R.I. And fine of Rs.2,000 and also compensation of Rs.2,000 to Ranizan P.W. Or in default to two months' R.I. Accused Afzal was also convicted under section 325, P.P.C. For injuries caused by him to Ranizan P.W, and sentenced to six months R.I. And fine of Rs.2,000 and compensation of Rs.2,000 payable to Ranizan P.W. Or in default to two months R.I. All of them were given the benefit of section 382-B Cr.P.C. The appellants, except Aslam, were not awarded any sentence under section 148, P.P.C. Because they had remained under trial for more than the prescribed punishment under section 148, P.P.C. Shafqat, Ranizan son of Karim Bakhsh, Ehsan son of Muhammad Din, Elahi Bakhsh, Nawaz son of Ghulam Haider and Mumtaz son of Rehmat were given the benefit of doubt and acuqitted. Ikram, Karim Bakhsh and Rahim Bakhsh sons of Elahi Bakhsh and Ashraf accused were awarded different sentences for causing injuries to some of the victims as detailed in the judgment of the trial Court. They did not challenge their conviction and sentences before the High Court and only the appellants preferred appeal which was heard by a Division Bench of the High Court and dismissed vide order dated 23-1-1979. Hence the instant appeal through leave of the Court.
6. We have heard Sardar Muhammad Latif Khosa, Advocate, for the appellants, Mian Attaur Rehman, Advocate, for the State and have perused the record of the case. The learned counsel for the appellants vehemently argued that the parties were inimical to each other and as such the statements of the witnesses, though injured, could not be accepted as gospel truth without independent corroboration; that the occurrence did not get support from circumstantial evidence inasmuch as no trail of blood was found to strengthen the version of the complainant with regard to the dragging of the deceased and injured persons; that the alleged recovery at the instance of the accused was discarded by the trial Court; that Aslam and Mumtaz appellants were attributed one fire shot each hitting the deceased Abdul Aziz on his legs which is probable with one shot by one assailant and finally, that Muhammad Aslam, appellant had 'satisfactorily established his plea of alibi -from the statements of independent witnesses Manzoor Hussain Shah, Advocate D.W.1 and Maqbul Ahmad, Record Keeper, Sessions Court, Multan D.W.2. The learned counsel for the appellants placed reliance on Bagh Ali and 4 others v. The State PLD 1973 SC 321, Wasiullah v. Mirza Ali and others PLD 1963 SC 25, Rehmat and others v. The State PLD 1959 SC (Pak.) 109, Muhammad Alsam and others v. The State 1988 SCM R 940, Ghulam Shabbir v. Bachal and another 1980 SCM R 708, Baber Ali and others v. The State PLD 1968 SC 372 and Mst. Hamida Bani v.,Ashiq Hussain and others PLD 1963 Supreme Court 109.
7. The learned counsel for the State, on the other hand, controverted the above submissions of the learned counsel for the appellants and stressed that the deceased Abdul Aziz and other victim of the attack, namely, Karim Bakhsh P.W.11, Ramzan P.W.12, Rahim Bakhsh, Muhammad Bakhsh and Pehlwan had received numerous injuries of different types and dimensions caused by different weapons as per the statement of Dr. Abdul Khaliq P.W.9 which establishes that the number of accused involved is not exaggerated and that the presence of P.W.11 and P.W.12 being injured cannot-be doubted.
8. We have anxiously considered the arguments of the learned counsel for the parties. The other convicts/co-accused of the appellants have not appealed against their conviction and sentences and as such the judgment of the trial Court has become final qua their participation in the occurrence.. Karim Bakhsh P.W.11 and Ranizan P.W.12 had the stamp of several injuries, incised, contused, abrasions and gunshot wounds .On their person and as such their presence at the spot cannot be doubted. The nature of injuries shows that they were caused to them from close range and it being a daylight occurrence they were in a position to identify their assailants. The other victims who are their close relations and were accompanying them to attend the Court had also been given several blows causing them incised wounds, contusions and abrasions as well. There is nothing on the record to show that the complainant party had any serious enmity with anybody else who may have gone to the extent of causing the death of Abdul Aziz deceased and injuring the P.Ws. And their companions. It is borne out by the record that the appellants had strong motive to harm the complainant party inasmuch as the mother of Aslam accused was murdered in 1967 for which Abdul Aziz deceased along with Karim Bakhsh P.W.11, Ramzan P.W.12, Pehlwan, Rahim Bakhsh, Sultan and other injured persons were challaned and Karim Bakhsh, Rahim Bakhsh and Pehlwan were convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment. There is no material contradictions in the statements of the prosecution witnesses. The learned lower two forums, therefore, placing reliance on the testimony of injured eye-witnesses corroborated by recoveries and the other circumstances I of the case convicted the appellants for the murder of Abdul Aziz deceased and causing injuries to others.
9. Nevertheless, it was asserted on behalf of the appellants that they are brothers inter se and they could not be expected to join together in the commission of the offence and thereby exposing themselves to grave dangor from the opposite side or running the risk of facing gallows together.
10. The reasoning may appear attractive but in view of the background of the case, the nature of injuries sustained by the complainant party and the highhandedness and brutality with which the crime was perpetrated, leave no room for doubt that the appellants and their kith and kin who have already been convicted, did participate in the instant tragedy and on mere .Hypothesis, direct evidence supplied by injured P.Ws. Cannot be brushed aside.
11. It was next contended that Muhammad Aslam appellant had pleaded alibi and produced disinterested evidence in support thereof and that the same was ignored without any plausible explanation. The trial Court as well as the. Appellate Court have properly considered this plea of Muhammad Aslant appellant and rejected the same for valid reasons which do not call for interference at this stage.
12. In view of what has been stated above, we do not rind any merit in the instant appeal and the same is hereby dismissed.