' This judgment will dispose of Criminal Appeal No,333 of 1997 filed by Mst. Bivi, wife of Allah Yar and Muhammad Aslam son of Allah Yar, who were convicted and sentenced by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sargodha on 5-6-1997 for the murder of Mst. Kausar Parveen under section 364, P.P.C. To undergo 10 years' R.I. Each with a fine of Rs,20,000 each, in default two years' R.I. Each. Fine if recovered was ordered to be paid to the State. Both the appellants were also convicted and sentenced under section 308, P.P.C. To undergo 14 years' R.I. Under Tazir, and also to pay Rs,2,50,000 as Diyat to be paid to the legal heirs of the deceased Mst. Kausar Parveen in equal share. All the sentences were ordered to rup concurrently. Benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C. Was also granted to the appellants.
2. It may also be mentioned here, that there is a Criminal Revision No,301 of 1997 for the enhancement of sentence filed by the complainant Mst. Sahib Khatoon against the present appellants. A Criminal appeal against one of the co-accused of the appellant namely Sahib Khatoon against her acquittal was filed by the complainant but the same was withdrawn by learned counsel for the complainant.
3. The matter was reported to the police on 1-8-1995 while the occurrence according to the F.I.R.
Had taken place eight months prior to the registration of this case. F.I.R. In this case is Exh.P.A. Which was lodged on 1-8-1995 at 8-25 a.m. On the statement of Mst. Sahib Khatoon complainant P.W.1 and the same was recorded by Mian Khan, S.H.O./Inspector P.W.10.
4. Briefly stated the facts of the prosecution case according to the F.I.R. Are that father of Mst. Sahib Khatoon and Mst. Kausar Parveen deceased died 17 years ago. Mst. Kausar Parveen deceased inherited 9-1/2 Acres of agricultural land. Mst. Kausar Parveen started living in the house of her maternal-uncle namely Khuda Bakhsh son of Ali Muhammad caste Kalyar resident of the village.
Ten years ago above said Khuda Bakhsh also died. Mst. Kausar Parveen kept on living with Mst.
Zinat Bibi widow of Khuda Bakhsh. Eight months prior to the occurrence it was settled that Mst.
Kausar Parveen was to be married with Muhammad Khan son of abovesaid Khuda Bakhsh. Three days prior to the occurrence Mst. Kausar Parveen was sitting in the house of Mst. Zinat Bibi,. She was wearing shirt having flowers of blue, yellow and black color printed. She was wearing Shalwar of green color. Mst. Sahib Khatoon complainant, Aman Ullah son of Munir Muhammad, Muhammad Abdullah son of Ahmad, Muhammad son of Sardara was sitting alongwith Mst. Kausar Parveen.
Mst. Bibi paternal-aunt of complainant and deceased, Muhammad Aslam husband of complainant and Mst. Sahib Khatoon daughter of Mst. Bivi came there and asked Mst. Kausar Parveen to accompany them to their house for an important work. All the abovesaid three accused took away Mst. Kausar Parveen along with them. Mst. Kausar Parveen did not return to the house till late night. Mst. Sahib Khatoon complainant, Aman Ullah and Muhammad Abdullah went to the house of Mst. Bivi etc. Mst. Bivi, Muhammad Aslam and Mst. Sahib Khatoon daughter of Mst. Bivi were present in the house from whom the whereabouts of Mst. Kausar Parveen were asked. All the three accused told that Mst. Kausar Parveen had left their house after some time. Complainant along with P.Ws. Started search for her. All the three accused tried to satisfy complainant that Mst.
Kausar Parveen might had gone to see some relatives and would come back. Mst. Kausar Parveen did not return as the accused persons had abducted her to kill her.
5. Motive as alleged in the F.I.R. Is that two years prior Muhammad Aslam accused sold away the trees valuing Rs,30,000. Mst. Kausar Parveen was demanding the above said money from the accused persons who were not returning the above said money to her. It was further alleged that two buffalos owned by Muhammad Aslam were in the possession of Mst. Kausar Parveen, one buffalo died. Muhammad Aslam was demanding the second buffalo from Mst. Kausar Parveen.
Mst. Kausar Parveen refused to return the buffalo and asked Muhammad Aslam to return the animals which were owned by her father. Muhammad Aslam and Mst. Bivi refused to return the above said property. All the three accused due to above said disputes took away Mst. Kausar Parveen with them to commit her murder. FA.R. No,138 was recorded on 1-8-1995 at the narration of Mst. Sahib Khatoon sister of Mst. Kausar Parveen deceased. F.I.R. Was read over and explained to her. Mst. Sahib Khatoon complainant put her thumb-impression at F.I.R. In token of its correctness.
6. Mst. Sahib Khatoon acquitted co-accused and Mst. Bivi appellant were arrested on 1-8-1995 while Muhammad Aslam appellant was arrested on 13-8-1995. Mst. Bivi got recovered the dead body of the deceased Mst. Kausar Parveen from her house on 1-8-1995. She also got recovered two bags of fertilizer P.2 and P.3 and Khais P.1, which were taken into possession vide memo. Exh.P.C. She also got recovered Kassi P.4. On 1-8-1995, which was taken into possession vide memo. Exh.P.D. Mst.
Sahib Khatoon acquitted co-accused got recovered hatchet which was taken into possession vide memo. Exh.P.E. On 10-8-1995. Muhammad Aslam appellant got recovered hatchet on 15-8-1995 which was taken into possession vide memo. Exh.P.F.
7. Prosecution in order to prove its case produced 11 witnesses in all. Thereafter, the statements of the appellants and their acquitted co-accused namely Sahib Khatoon were recorded under section 342, Cr.P.C. Sahib Khatoon co-accused of the appellants was acquitted by the learned trial Court while both the appellants were convicted and sentenced by the learned trial Court as mentioned above.
8. Learned counsel for the appellants has read before me the prosecution evidence, statements of the appellants recorded under section 342, Cr.P.C. And makes the following submissions. He submits that there is an inordinate delay of eight months in lodging the F.I.R. Without any plausible explanation. He submits that there is no eye-witness of the alleged occurrence. He submits that prosecution has failed to prove the motive in this case against the appellants. He submits that recoveries of alleged weapons from the appellants have been planted on them. He also submits that case of the appellants is on similar footing to that of Mst. Sahib Khatoon, who has been acquitted by the learned trial Court. Lastly he has specifically referred to the cross-examination of Mst. Sahib Khatoon complainant, wherein she has stated "that I was living in the house of Muhammad Aslam accused (appellant) as his wife in the same house from which the dead body of Mst. Kausar Parveen was recovered. I remained in the abovesaid house with the accused (Muhammad Aslam appellant) till the registration of case". He submits that prosecution has miserably failed to prove its case against the appellants and they are entitled to acquittal.
9. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State assisted by learned counsel for the complainant submits that in the instant case, Muhammad Aslam appellant is husband of the complainant Mst.
Sahib Khatoon while Mst. Bivi is mother of Muhammad Aslam appellant and Mst. Sahib Khatoon (acquitted co-accused) is sister of Muhammad Aslam appellant and there was no question of false implication against the present appellants. He also submits that it was Mst. Bivi, who led to the recovery of dead body of the deceased Mst. Kausar Parveen from a room situated in her house. He also submits that recoveries of weapons of offence have been done from both the appellants. He also submits that in fact it was a case of capital punishment but the learned trial Court has taken a lenient view and has awarded only life imprisonment to the appellants.
10. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the evidence recorded by the learned trial Court. In the instant case, A F.I.R. Was lodged with a delay of eight months without any plausible explanation whatsoever. It is also observed, that Mst. Sahib Khatoon complainant has admitted during the cross-examination in categorical terms that she had been living with Muhammad Aslam appellant in her house till the registration of case. It is very strange that she did not come to know for eight long months that the dead body of her sister Mst. Kausar Parveen was buried in the same house, where she was living, which is most unnatural and improbable and cannot be accepted without the pinch of salt. The motive alleged by the prosecution in my view has also not been proved by the prosecution because on the same evidence Mst. Sahib Khatoon co-accused of the appellant was acquitted by the learned trial Court.
The appeal against her acquittal was filed in this Court but the same was withdrawn for the reasons best known to the complainant. The case of the appellant is somewhat on the similar footing to that of Mst. Sahib Khatoon, who was acquitted by the learned trial Court. While extending the benefit of doubt to the appellants I accept this appeal. The conviction and sentence awarded to the appellants by the learned trial Court is set aside. Appellants are in judicial lock-up. They shall be released forthwith if not required in any other case. Criminal Revision No,301 of 1997 filed by the complainant Mst. Sahib Khatoon for the enhancement of sentence against both the appellants is dismissed.