' This judgment will dispose of Criminal Appeal No,66-J of 1998 filed by Qutab-ud-Din appellant, who was convicted and sentenced for the murder of his wife Mst. Sitara Bibi by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Faisalabad on 12-12-1997 to undergo 14 years' R.I. As "Tazir" under section 308, P.P.C.
With the further direction to pay Rs,1,70,000 as "Diyat" to the legal heirs of the deceased. Benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C. Was also granted to the appellant.
2. The occurrence in this case took place on 5-8-1985 at about 1-30 p.m. In the house of the appellant situated in Chak No,71/RB, 10-Kms. Away from Police Station, Khurrianwala, District Faisalabad and the matter was reported to the police on the same day at 3-30 p.m. By Muhammad Hussain, real brother of the deceased Mst. Sitara Bibi at Adda Rasool Pura through complaint Exh.P.F. While the formal F.I.R. Exh.P.E./1 was recorded by Asghar Ali, S.I. At 3-45 p.m. In the above said police station.
3. The allegations against the accused/ appellant as disclosed from the F.I.R. Lodged by Muhammad Hussain son of Nazam Din complainant are that he was resident of Chak No,20/GB.
Tehsil Nankana Sahib and that his sister Mst. Sitara Bibi was married to Qutab Din accused resident of Chak No,71/RB. Police Station Khurrianwala. About 6 months prior to the lodging of F.I.R. Mst. Sitara Bibi went to Chak No,20/GB, after having quarrel with the accused. The accused went twice to get his wife back, but on both the occasions returned back, after having quarrel with his wife. On 4-8- 1995, Siraj Din, the father-in-law of Mst, Sitara Bibi went to Chak No,20/GB and on 5-8-1995, the complainant Muhammad Hussain alongwith Sulemen, his real brother and one Muhammad Hussain son of Noor Muhammad caste Gujjar came to Chak No,71/RB alongwith Sitara Bibi, the sister of the complainant, so that both Mst. Sitar Bibi and Qutab Din be got compromised with each other by collecting persons from brotherhood. At about 1-30 p.m., as stated in F.I.R. The complainant was coming from Mosque that when he reached near the house of Qatab Din accused, he heard commotion and as such entered into the house hurriedly where he witnessed Qatab Din, his brother-in-law, armed with Churri present there and had tied both the hands of Mst.
Sitar Bibi. He inflicted two Churri belows which seated on her neck and left flank. The complainant, then tried to over power Qatab Din accused/appellant but he threatened him on the point of chhuri of the dire consequences. In the meanwhile, Suleman the real brother of P.W. And Muhammad Hussain, who were present nearby reached there and within their view Mst. Sitar Bibi fell down on the ground, smeared with blood. It is, next stated in the F.I.R. That accused/appellant had given repeated blows with Churri on Mst. Sitara Bibi which seated on right flank, right and left hands and right upper leg. All the three then tried to apprehend the accused but he managed to run away with Churri from the place of occurrence. Mst. Sitara Bibi then succumbed to the injuries at the spot.
4. Motive behind the scene is that about 5/6 months prior to the occurrence, Mst. Sitara Bibi deceased had left the house of the accused, after having her strained relations with him and that accused/appellant went twice to fetch her, but she did not accompany him to his house and that out of the said grievance the accused committed her "Qatl-eAmd". The complainant then leaving the dead body at the spot in the guard of Suleman and Muhammad Hussain, went to police station and while he was on the way, he met the police party near Adda Rasul Pura, where he got recorded statement Exh.PF on the basis of which F.I.R. Exh.PF/1 was recorded.
5. The Investigating Officer, thereafter, came to the spot, did the formal investigation and also took into possession blood-stained earth vide memo. Exh.P.G. He tried to arrest the appellant and ultimately he was arrested on 7-8-1995. Appellant, while in police custody on 10-8-1995 got recovered Churri P.4, blood-stained which was taken into possession vide memo. Exh.P.H. The reports of Chemical Examiner regarding the bloodstained earth and blood-stained Chhuri are Exh.P.K. And Exh.P.L. While the reports of Serologist regarding the blood-stained earth and blood- stained Chhurri are Exh.P.M. And Exh . P. N
6. Prosecution in order to prove its case produced eight witnesses in all. Thereafter, the statement of the appellant was recorded under section 342, Cr.P.C. Appellant had also appeared in his defence as required under section 340, Cr.P.C. His brother Ghulam Gaus also appeared as D.W.1 in his defence. Learned counsel for the appellant has read before me the prosecution evidence, statements of the appellant recorded under section 342, Cr.P.0 and under section 340(2), Cr.P.0 and statement of D.W.1. After going through the same he submits that two eyewitnesses produced by the prosecution are close relation of the deceased, that they lived 15 miles away from the, place of occurrence and their presence 'at the spot is most unnatural and improbable. He also submits that from the very first day, appellant had taken that plea of grave and sudden provocation. He also submits that appellant has got six children from the wedlock of her wife Mst. Sitara Bibi and the motive which has been given by' the first informant in the F.I.R. Is not plausible one. He submits that appellant has already undergone three years, eight months and fifteen days of sentence and that should be treated as sufficient in the present circumstances of the case.
7. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State submits that appellant is the only accused in this case, that he has admitted his guilt before the trial Court, that he has committed brutal murder of his wife. He has got six children and he deserves no leniency.
8. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the evidence recorded by the learned trial Court. It may be noted here, that from the first day, plea of the appellant was that he had acted under grave and sudden provocation. The motive as given in the F.I.R. And also before the learned trial Court is not of that nature that appellant should have killed his wife. In the present case Muhammad Hussain complainant is real brother of the deceased.
While other Muhammad Hussain, P.W. Is from brother-hood of the deceased, and they are not residing near the place of occurrence. Appellant has admitted his guilt in his statement under section 342, Cr.P.0 and took the plea of grave and sudden provocation and the same is substantiated by his statement recorded under section 340(2), Cr.P.C. His real brother Ghulam Gaus, who was resident of the adjacent house of the appellant, also appeared as D.W.1 and has supported the version of the appellant. If both the versions are put in juxta position the version put forward by the appellant seems to be more convincing and plausible one. Appellant has already undergone three years, eight months and fifteen days sentence, His sentence from section 308, P.P.C. Is converted to section 302-C, P.P.C. And the sentence which he has already undergone is treated to be sufficient in the interest of justice. He shall be released forthwith if not required in any other case. With these observations, this appeal stands disposed of.