' DR. KHALID RANJHA, J.--- Mehram, Khizar, Zakir, Jahangir, Nusrat, Muhammad Afzal and Daulat were tried by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Chiniot for the murder of Manzoor as well as for murderous assault on Langra with a common concert after making themselves into an unlawful assembly, and found guilty on all counts. On the charge under section 302/149, Mehram was sentenced to death whereas the remaining six accused namely Khizar, Zakir, Jahangir, Muhammad Afzal, Nusrat, Zakir and Daulat were awarded imprisonment for life. They were also ordered to pay fine of Rs,10,000 each or in default to undergo two years' R.I. For the offence under section 307/149, P.P.C. They were all given ten years' R.I. With fine of Rs,2,000 each or in default to undergo six months' R.I. All of them were also convicted under section 148/149, P.P.C. To one year's R.I.
2. The Murder Reference No,440 of 1992 seeks confirmation of the sentence of death. All the convicts/appellants on the other hand have preferred Criminal Appeal No,924 of 1992 challenging their conviction and sentence. The complainant of this case (Langra) also filed Criminal Revision to ask for enhancement of fine of Mehram and also for imposition of death sentence with higher fine on the remaining accused/appellants. All three matters are being disposed of together.
3. Khizar and Muhammad Afzal appellants are reported to have died. Criminal Appeal No,924 of 1992 to their extent, therefore, stands abated.
4. The brief facts of this case are that on 16-7-1990 Langra (P.W.8) made a statement (Exh.P.L.) at 8- 45 a.m. At Civil Hospital, Bhowana to Habib-urRehman, S.-I. (P.W.10) on the receipt of which at Police Station Bhowana, Munir Ahmad, M.H.C. (P.W.11) registered F.I.R. (Exh.P.M.) at 8-55 a.m.
5. It was stated by Langra (P.W.8) that at about 6-00 a.m. He along with Manzoora alias Munoo, Noora and Nawaz (P.W.9) were going to Chiniot to appear in the Court of Judicial Magistrate in a case under section 307, P.P.C. When they reached near Rajbah Pakhra Sultan; they found themselves ambushed by Mehram, Nusrat, Khizar and Jahangir armed with guns accompanied by Daulat, Zakir and Afzal accused emerged armed with Sotas. On seeing them, they raised a Lalkara that they would teach them a lesson for having beaten up Mehram and not let them go alive. At this he (Langra) along with other companions started running back, however, the aforesaid accused chased them and overtook them in the revenue limits of Chak No,187/J.B. Khizar accused fired at Manzoor hitting him at the back of right leg. The second shot was fired by Mehram hitting Manzoor on the right leg on the front side. He fell down on receiving both these fire shots. Nusrat accused fired at him (Langra), hitting him on his right knee, while the shot fired by Jahangir hit him on the left calf. Thereafter, Daulat, Zakir and Afzal gave Sota blows to Manzoor on the chest, right shoulder and right arm respectively. Daulat, too, gave him (Langra) Sota blow on the right leg.
6. Manzoor died at the spot whereas Langra the first informant, was removed to Civil Hospital. The motive behind the occurrence according to Langrd was that Mehram had got registered a case under section 307, P.P.C. Against them and to avenge the injury suffered by Mehram, the accused had launched the attack in the manner narrated above.
7. After recording the statement of Langra (P.W.8) at the hospital, Habeeb-ur-Rehman, S.-I. (P.W.10) proceeded to the spot and collected bloodstained earth vide memo. (Exh.P.F.). He got prepared the site plan (Exh.P.G.) from the Halqa Patwari. On the death of Manzoor he completed the formalities of preparing the injury statements as well as the inquest report and dispatched the dead body for post-mortem examination and took into possession the last-worn clothes of the deceased vide memo. (Exh.P.D.). In the course of investigation on 22-8-1990, he arrested Jahangir accused while carrying gun ' (Exh.P.4) and five cartridges (Exh.P.5/1-5) which were taken into possession vide memo. (Exh.P.H.)
On the same day, he arrested Mehram, carrying gun (P.6) with five cartridges (Exh.P.7/1-5) which were taken into possession vide memo. (Exh.P.J.). On 7-9-1990 he arrested Khizar accused with his gun (P.8) and four cartridges (Exh.P.8/1-4) which were taken into possession vide memo. (Exh.P.K.).
After completing the various steps of investigation challah was submitted against the accused except Nusrat, Zakir and Adulate as they were found innocent. The investigation was, however, transferred to Muhammad Younis who found Muhammad Afzal also innocent. The innocence of all the four accused referred to above was also verified by Amjad Javaid, A.S.P. He, too, found the finding of innocence of the afore-referred four accused to be correct and reliable.
8. In the course of trial, the prosecution produced eleven witnesses. Dr. Nasir Mehmood appeared as P.W.1 who deposed about the injuries suffered by both the deceased and the complainant.
According to him, the injuries on Langrage (P.W.8) were as follows:--
(i) A lacerated oval shape wound 0.6 c.m. x 0.5 c.m. On lateral side right knee with inverted margins slightly blackened with profuse bleeding.
(ii) A wound with everted margins 0.4 c.m. x 0.5 c.m. On the medial side of right knee. It was a lacerated wound.
(iii) A wound with inverted margins slightly blackened 0.4 c.m. x 0.5 c.m. On lower ante-roateral surface of right knee.
(iv) A wound with everted margins 0.3 c.m. x 0.4 c.m. On lower antero medial side of right knee.
(v) An abrasion 2.2 c.m. x 0.3 c.m. On lower anterial surface of right knee.
(vi) An oval lacerated wound 0.3 c.m. x 0.4 c.m. On the antero medial aspect of left knee with inverted margins and slightly blackish margins.
(vii) A lacerated wound 0.2 c.m. x 0.3 c.m. With everted margins on upper lateral left leg.
(viii)A lacerated oval wound 0.6 c.m. x 0.5 c.m. On medial side of upper left leg with inverted margins.
(ix) A lacerated wound 3.1 c.m. x 0.4 c.m. On back of upper left leg with everted margins.
(x) A wound with inverted margins 0.3 c.m. x 0.5 c.m. On lateral upper side of left leg.
(xi) An averted margin wound 0.3 c.m. x 0.4 c.m. On back of leg slightly blackish edges. It was a lacerated wound.
(xii) A lacerated wound 2.2 c.m. x 3.0 c.m. On back of upper leg inverted slightly with blackish margins.
(xiii)A lacerated wound 0.6 c.m. x 0.5 c.m. On back of leg everted margins. Whereas injuries on the person of Manzoor (deceased) were as under:--
(xiv) A swelling 5 c.m. x 4 c.m. On left chest lateral to nipple.
(xv) A bruise 4 c.m. x 5/2 c.m. On right lateral abdomen.
(xvi)A lacerated wound 3/2 c.m. x 0.6 c.m. On back of lower right arm.
(xvii)A swelling 15 c.m. x 11.8 c.m. On antero lateral surface of right thigh.
(xviii)A lacerated wound with inverted margins slightly blackish 0.4 c.m. x 0.6 c.m.
0.5 c.m. x 0.6 c.m.
0.3 c.m. x 0.4 c.m., 0.5 c.m. x 0.4 c.m., 0.4 c.m. x 0.4 c.m., 1 c.m. x 0.5 c.m. x 0.3 c.m., 0.5 c.m. x 0.4 c.m.
On anterior upper thigh of right side probe passed through the wound.
(xix) An oval lacerated wound with averted margins 0.6 c.m. x 0.5 c.m., 0.4 c.m. x 0.5 c.m. On upper lateral right thigh.
(xx) 5 oval shaped lacerated wounds 0.5 c.m. x 0.4 c.m., 0.5 c.m. x 0.4 c.m., 0.5 c.m. x 0.6 c.m., 0.3 c.m. x 0.5 c.m. And 0.3 c.m. x 0.5 c.m. On the back of upper right thigh.
' Nazar Hussain, F.C. (P.W.2) Sikandar Hayat, F.C. (P.W.3), and Daulat (P.W.4) appeared as formal witnesses whereas Muhammad Siddique (P.W.5) Revenue Pataki proved the site plan of occurrence. Riaz Ahmad (P.W.6) -.And Umar Hayat (P.W.7) proved the recoveries of fire-arms of the accused. Langrage (P.W.8) gave an eye-witness account in accord with the F.I.R. Lodged by him. He was subjected to a lengthy cross-examination. Nawaz (P.W.9) who was neither inimical to the deceased and nor related to complainant party also appeared as an eye-witness and supported the version of the first informant, the injured eye-witness. The steps taken in the process of investigation referred to earlier were proven by Habib-ur-Rehman (P.W. l0) and Umar Hayat (P.W.11).
9. After close of the prosecution case, the accused denied the prosecution story and maintained that all P. Ws. Were closely related to the deceased and inimical towards them and had deposed falsely against them due to this reason.
10. We examined the entire evidence with the help of the learned counsel for the defense as well as learned counsel for the State. The case of the prosecution rests primarily on the ocular evidence read in conjunction with the medical evidence. As far as Langra (P.W.8) the first informant, is concerned, he A is injured. His presence, at the spot is well-beyond doubt. There certainly exists a background of criminal litigation between the complainant and the accused party. The defense version, that emerges from the trend of cross-examination, is that the complainant/deceased had other enemies also. Probably one of them had launched the assault which resulted in death of Manzoor and injuries to Langra, and the latter substituted the appellants instead of the actual accused. We do not agree with contention that complainant would substitute the real assailants by the present appellants. Swelling the list of accused is understandable, but complete substitution is a rare phenomenon. The statement of the injured complainant was recorded promptly. There was not much time to release and weave out a plan for substitution of real accused by otherwise innocent enemies.
11. It has been argued by the learned defense counsel that Langrage the injured witness had tried to make improvements in his statement to bring it in line with the medical evidence. We have scrutinized the medical evidence in juxtaposition with ocular account, but do not find any glaring discrepancies whereby one may feel compelled to discard such testimony. In our view the ocular account and the medical evidence are rather consistent with each other.
12. The Investigating Officer (P.W.10) stated that in the course of investigation Nusrat, Zakir, Daulat and Afzal were found innocent in the successive investigations. The injuries ascribed to Daulat, Zakir and Afzal are with their Sotas. Zakir and Afzal allegedly, gave a Sota blow each to Manzoor and langrage. Looking at the blunt weapon injuries both on the person of the deceased and the first informant Langrage (P.W.8), we find that abrasion 2.2 c.m. x 3 c.m. On the right knee suffered by langrage and attributed to Daulat, it cannot be described as an injury by Sota wielded in anger. As such injury on the person of langrage, attributed to Daulat appellant seems to be doubtful.
13. Similarly, the deceased had three blunt weapon injuries (a) 5 c.m. x 4 c.m. On the left chest, (b) bruise 4 c.m. x 5 c.m. On the right abdomen, and (c) swelling 15 c.m. x 11 c.m. On the right thigh. Zakir is attributed injury on the right shoulder, Afzal to the right abdomen and Adulate on the chest of the deceased. The location of these injuries in the medical report does not correspond with the verbal averment made by langrage. These three accused have also been found to be innocent as well in successive investigations. Their participation is, thus, not free from doubt.
14. Nusrat is attributed a fire-arm injury on the knee of langrage. This accused/appellant was found innocent during investigation. So much so it was not deemed necessary by the police even to arrest him. His case also is not found free of doubt. In view of what has been stated above, Nusrat, Zakir and Daulat have made out a case for acquittal. Criminal Appeal No,924 of 1992 to their extent is, therefore, accepted. Khizar and Muhammad Afzal already died. The appeal to their extent stands abated. Learned counsel does not press their appeal qua the fine. As for, Mehram and Jahangir, we find that they were involved in this case and played the part attributed to them. The appeal to their extent is, therefore, dismissed.
15. The question of sentence, however, has engaged our attention considerably. The injuries attributed to both Mehram and Jahangir appellants are on the non-vital part of the body of the deceased and the injured P.W. Respectively.
16. We feel, it would be very harsh in such circumstances to confirm the death sentence of Mehram.
His sentence is reduced to imprisonment for life. Resultantly, both Mehram and Jahangir would suffer sentence of life with fine of Rs,10,000 each or two years' R.I. In default. They are also convicted under section 307/34, P.P.C. For the murderous assault on Langat P.W. And each is awarded ten years' R.I. With Rs,2,000 fine. Their conviction under section 148, P.P.C. Is, however, set aside. All the sentences shall run concurrently with benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C. The Murder Reference is answered in the negative.