' JAMALUDDIN H. AHMED, J.-Appellants were tried and convicted by the Sessions Judge, Jacobabad for offence under section 302 read with 34, P. P. C. For having killed deceased Adam and Mst. Sabul.
They were sentenced to life imprisonment and also to pay a fine of Rs, 1,000 each or in default to suffer R. I. For six months more. They have now assailed the said conviction and sentence by filing these appeals.
2. The murder of Adam took place in the morning of 19th July 1972 in the land of one Araz Muhammad in Deb Karto which place was at a distance of about 3 miles from Tangwani Police Station. While complainant Ghulam Hyder and his brother Muhammad Panna were collecting grass in the land of Araz Muhammad, and Abdul Jabar was looking after the land, deceased Adam the complainant's cousin came up from the village of Muhammad Masood, carrying oil-cake on his head. Suddenly there were cries of 'murder' which attracted their attention and they saw the three appellants giving hatchet blows to the deceased, who was shrieking but was knocked down.
They declared that they had killed him as he was Karo with Mst. Sabul wife of opponent Shah Nawaz. After murdering Adam the three appellants went away. The complainant went and procured a cot and learned from other villagers who turned up in the meantime that the appellants had also murdered Mst. Sabul wife of the appellant Shah Nawaz, in her house accusing her of adultery. Mr. Ghulam Hyder then proceeded to the police station and lodged his report which was recorded by A. S. I. Ghulam Hussain Shah at 2-30 p.m.
3. The Police Officer, accompanied the complainant to the place of incident where the dead body of deceased Adam was lying on the ground. He prepared mashirnama and secured blood-stained earth, the oil-cake and tin of oil from there in presence of mashirs Pandhi and Ali Muhammad. He sent the dead body of Adam to the Civil Hospital for post-mortem examination. He then proceeded to the house of appellant Shah Nawaz where he found the dead body of deceased Mst. Sabul lying on the ground near the fire. He secured the blood-stained earth and sent the dead body to the Civil Hospital for post-mortem examination.
' He examined Abdul Jabbar, Misri, Khair Muhammad and Panah, who were present. On 21-9-72 he arrested the appellants from their house, and secured blood-stained shirt of appellant Janoo and also the blood-stained hatchet that he volunteered to produce in presence of mashirs Pandhi and Ali Muhammad. He sent the blood-stained articles to the Chemical Analyser for test, whereafter he handed over the investigation to S. H. O. Salim Hussain Shah, who finally challaned the case, on 7- 10-1972.
4. At the trial the eye-witness account of the incident was furnished by P. W. 5, Ghulam Hyder P. W.
6, Muhammad Pannah P. W. 7, Abdul Jabbar who saw the murder of Adam, while P. W. 8 Misri and P.
W. 9 Khair Muhammad had witnessed the murder of Mst. Sabul, P. W. 3 Pandhi mashir was examined to further support this evidence as in his presence two dead bodies were secured and the appellants were arrested by the investigating Police. The arrest took place on the 3rd day of the incident, although, police had searched the house of the accused on the 1st day, but, they were not present. At the time of arrest, a shirt, a gunii and loin-cloth of appellant Jano were secured, which were blood-stained. He also produced a hatchet, from inside his house, which was also blood- stained. All these articles were certified by Chemical Examiner, to be stained with human blood.
5. According to the Medical Officer, Dr. Bhimmandas, who was the A. M.
0. Ghouspur, and who held the post-mortem examination of the two dead bodies, deceased Adam had the following injuries on his person :
(1) Incised wound cutting all the structures of the neck except flap of skin and muscles of right side.
The injury was situated on back and left side of neck.
(2) Sliced incised wound 4' X 2' x clavicle cut on left shoulder top.
(3) Incised wound 1 x * x skin above left clavicle.
(4) Incised wound 3' X 2 chopping upper layers of left temporal bone on temporal region left side.
(5) Incised wound x x skin on right shoulder longitudinally.
' In the opinion of the Medical Officer, his death was due to shock and haemorrhage, which was consequence of the above injuries, and which was caused by a sharp-edged substance like a hatchet. Injury No, 1, individually and all injuries collectively were sufficient, in the ordinary course of nature, to cause death.
' Deceased Mst. Sabul had the following injuries on her person :
(1) Incised wound 6' x 2" x brain cut on frontal regions transversely.
(2) Incised wound 8' x 1-1/2 x brain cut on left temporal parietal and occipital regions transversely.
(3) Incised wound cutting left thumb at metacorpophalyngealy joint. Thumb is separated.
' In his opinion these injuries were caused by a sharp-edged heavy weapon, and the death had occurred due to shock and haemorrhage, resulting from these injuries. Injuries Nos. 1 and 2, individually and all collectively were sufficient in the ordinary course of nature, to cause death.
6. The case of the appellant, was that of denial, they denied to have killed Adam, or even, Mst.
Sabul, they also denied that they had disappeared from their house till the date of their arrest; appellant Jano, further denied that his clothes had been secured, or that they were blood-stained.
He also denied, that he had produced any blood-stained hatchet. He denied, any relationship with the prosecution witness and admitted that appellant Shah Nawaz, is his uncle, and appellant Saleh, a distant cousin. He alleged that he had been involved in the case on account of enmity, which was over sangha bandhi, as his uncle Shah Nawaz had some time prior to the incident, agreed to give the hand of his daughter to P. W. Abdul Jabbar, but had subsequently, changed and given her to some other person at Shandadkot. About the murder of Mst. Sabul he did not know anything, as he had already been arrested by the police. The statement of appellant Salah, was also to the same effect. Appellant Shah Nawaz, claimed to have gone to see his brother at Shandadkot, six days prior to the incident, where he had been informed of the incident, by one Aman. He had returned and gone to the Police Station to lodge the report about the murder of his wife, but, had been arrested. He further, stated that he had heen implicated in this case as the witnesses were annoyed with him because he had married his daughter Alam Khatoon, with some person at Shandadkot, after breaking his promise with Abdul Jabbar. No evidence was however examined in defence.
7. Mr. Abdul Fatah Memon, learned counsel for the appellants pointed out that the P. Ws. Being admittedly related to the deceased Adam and also to each other, their evidence cannot be considered as independent as should normally be expected, in the circumstances of this case. No other person from the area or vicinity has been examined although the place of incident where deceased Adam was murdered was surrounded by different cultivated areas and the presence of other witnesses would ordinarily and naturally be presumed on those lands. On the other hand the Investigating Police did not find and secure any grass alleged to have been cut by these witnesses nor were their sickles etc. Found from the land, which shows that in all probability the complainant Ghulam Hyder or the other eyewitnesses were not at the spot as claimed by them. He further referred to the omission made by complainant Ghulam Hyder to mention the names of P. Ws. Misri and Khair Muhammad, in the F. I. R. Which according to him indicated not only that these witnesses had not seen the appellants murdering Mst. Sabul, but also that the complainant himself was not a reliable witness. Misri and Khair Muhammad had heard cries of the womenfolk from the house of the appellants where deceased Sabul was murdered, but none of those women was examined in Court. This indicated a selection of witnesses by the prosecution, of those, who are related to the complainant. According to the learned counsel there was also no corroborative evidence in the case. P. W. Pandhi who acted as mashir, on his own showing had been called, when the appellants were already in the custody of the Police. The arrest took place long after the occurrence. It is not possible that appellant would continue to wear the same clothes which he allegedly had on his person while committing the murder. It also does not appeal to reason that appellant Jano should have kept a hatchet with blood stains for such a long time in his house. This witness had also admitted his relationship with the complainant Ghulam Hyder and therefore stood on the same footing as the others. The whole evidence, therefore, in the submission of the learned counsel was unreliable and not sufficient to support the conviction of the appellants.
8. The trial Court, considered the eye-witnesses to be the natural witnesses of the incident, who had no reason to falsely implicate the appellants or to substitute them in place of the real culprits.
Although, the motive for false implication set up by the appellants, that is, of refusal to give the hand of his daughter by appellant Shah Nawaz, to P. W. Abdul Jabbar, and committing a breach of promise thereby, was factually admitted to be correct by prosecution witness Pandhi, it was held not sufficient to rob the witnesses of their credibility. The reasoning of the trial Court, is not incorrect, because the two murders having taken place during broad daylight, this was not a case of an unwitnessed crime, nor is the suggested motive, so grave as to justify the inference that the witnesses would on that account exonerate the real culprits and implicate the appellants instead.
It is no doubt, true that the eye-witnesses in this case are related, but, that alone would not make their evidence unworthy of credit. In absence of any enmity or a strong motive it cannot be said that these witnesses implicated the appellants, falsely for a crime that they did not commit. There can be a possibility of the presence of other persons at the two places where the murders were committed, but the fact had been denied by the eye-witnesses and no question had been put to any of the investigating police officers in this regard. In absence of any material on record, it can not be assumed that some persons other than the eye-witnesses had actually seen the murders, but, their evidence suppressed by the prosecution. The witnesses actually examined have explained their presence, which appears quite natural. They have not been falsified in any manner.
The two murders were committed at two different places after making an open declaration that this was a case of adultery. That fact was not even challenged in cross-examination of the prosecution witnesses. The appellants took the plea that they did not know about the murder of Mst. Sabul, as two of them were already taken in custody, while appellant Shah Nawaz was out of village. He was arrested, when, on his return he went to lodge the report about the murder of Mst.
Sabul, his wife. This does not seem to be believable.
' The eye-witnesses, undoubtedly, appear to be natural and true. Their evidence finds support also from the medical evidence, which shows that the two murders had taken place by about the same time. It is further substantiated by mashir Pandhi and the Investigating Officer, who proved theA securing of blood-stained earth from the two different places of the murders, besides, securing of blood-stained clothes and hatchet of appellant Jano. The evidence is quite consistent and is free from any material discrepancies.
9. In view of the above, the three appeals filed by the appellants have no merit and are hereby dismissed. AGHA ALI RYDER, J.---I agree.