' IFTIKHAR HUSSAIN CHAUDHRY, Ahmad son of Sher Muhammad armed with 12 bore shot-gun alongwith Shana armed with pistol, Ghulam Farid armed with rifle entered the house of Sultan Ali at 4.00 a.m. On 20-8-1990 while Mukhtar Ahmad son of Ghulam Muhammad armed with rifle, Nasrullah and Painda armed with 12 bore shot-gun stood by the outer gate of the house. Mukhtar Ahmad son of Sher Muhammad shot dead Zafar Iqbal son of Sultan due to suspected illicit liaison with Mst. Maqsood Bibi daughter of Haitam. Sultan, complainant P.W.6, alleged that the accused had committed the murder at the instance of Nawaz and Haitam, accused. Case: F.I.R. No,278, dated 20-8-1990 Exh. P.B.1 was registered at 8.05 a.m. On the same day at Police Station Qadirabad located 14 miles away from the village.
2. Safdar Inayat, Inspector/S.H.O. Police Station Qadirabad recorded statement Exh.P.B. Of Sultan Ali, sent the same to Police Station for registration F.I.R., proceeded to the spot, prepared injury statement Exh.P.F. Inquest report Exh. P.G. Of Zafar Iqbal and sent the dead body under escort of Muhammad Ilyas, C. P.W.5 to Civil Hospital Phalia, recovered blood-stained earth from the spot and secured the same vide memo., Exh.P.E. He got prepared site plans Exhs.P.C. And P.C.1 from draftsman P.W.4. He arrested Mukhtar Ahmad son of Sher Muhammad on 28-8-1990. Mukhtar accused led to recovery of shot-gun p.5 which was secured vide memo. Exh.P.J. These recoveries were also effected in connection with case F.I.R. No,277 of 1990 of the same Police Station registered, inter alia, against Mukhtar son of Shera. He also recorded statements of witnesses and thereafter, challaned the accused to Court.
3. Prosecution examined 13 witnesses at the trial.
4. Dr. Shahid Hassan Chatha, P.W.1 conducted post-mortem examination on the dead body of Zafar Iqbal aged 23 years at 4-30 p.m. On 20-8-1990. He noticed the following injury on his body:--
(1) Lacerated wound 3 x 3 c.m. Going deep into body cavity in the lower part of the sternum just above the line joining nipples slightly on the right side. The surrounding are was blackened and tattooed.
' In cross-examination, the witness said that the shot was fired from within a range of 3 feet and the assailant was at a higher level than the deceased. According to him the deceased had taken last meal about 8 hours earlier and time of death accordingly was given by him as 4.00 a.m.
5. The draughtsman appeared as P.W.4. The witness had prepared site plans Exhs.P.C. And P.C.I. In cross-examination the witness said that the place of occurrence was situated inside the village abadi.
6. Sultan, complainant appeared as P.W.6. He affirmed the prosecution story. Mst, Mumtaz Begum sister of deceased appeared as P.W.7. She supported the version of Sultan. Muhammad Aslam, a tenant of Sultan appeared as P.W.B. He had seen Mukhtar carrying a gun and other accused emerging from the house of the complainant and other accused as standing outside the house.
Muhammad Arshad P.W.9 is witness of conspiracy. Recovery of blood-stained earth was proved by Muhammad Saghir P.W.10. He also identified the dead body of Zafar Iqbal and further deposed about hatching of conspiracy. Muhammad Afzal had witnessed recovery of gun P.5 having been effected at the instance of Mukhtar son of Shera and of rifle P.4 having been got recovered by Mukhtar son of Ghulam Muhammad.
7. Safdar Inayat, Inspector/S.H.O. Appeared as P.W.11. He took various steps during investigation and had challaned the accused to Court. Muhammad Nawaz D.S.P. Appeared as P.W.13. He had found all the accused guilty during investigation.
8. The accused in their examination under section 342, Cr. P.C. Professed innocence and claimed false implication due to enmity.
9. The learned Additional Sessions Judge Gujrat believed the prosecution case to the extent of Mukhtar Ahmad son of Sher Muhammad and convicted him under section 302, P.P.C. And vide judgment dated 14-3-1991 sentenced him as under: ' Death sentence and a fine of Rs 25,000 in default of payment of which to undergo R.I. Of three years. The convict was directed to pay a sum of Rs,25,000 as compensation to legal heirs of the deceased. In case of default, the convict was to undergo 6 months imprisonment.
' 7 co-accused of Mukhtar were, however, acquitted.
10. The convict submitted Criminal Appeal No, 325 of 1991 against theconviction and sentence awarded to him. Criminal Revision Petition No, 247 /91 was filed by the complainant seeking setting aside acquittal of co-accused of the convict. Matter has also been referred vide M.R. 142 of 1991 by the trial Court for confirmation of the sentence of death imposed on Mukhtar. Learned counsel for the parties have been heard.
11. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the prosecution case was that Nawaz son of Shera suspected that the deceased had illicit relations with Mst Maqsood Bibi daughter of Haitam and Nawaz and Haitam had conspired to _ do away with the deceased and it was nowhere alleged that Mukhtar appellant had such a grievance and that the case of prosecution to the extent of conspiracy had failed and the appellant was, thus, not connected the commission of the offence because of severing of the link provided by the conspiracy. It was further argued that Shana, Farid and Nassrullah brothers and husband of MaqsoOd Bibi were present with the accused and it would not appeal to reason that a distant cousin would have done to death Zafar Iqbal for which he had no motive. It was further contended that the prosecution case to the extent of majority of accused was disbelieved and the appellant was also entitled to the benefit of doubt to be given to him.
' Learned counsel for the State assisted by learned counsel for the complainant supported the impugned judgment. It was argued that the convict was brother or Nawaz and had praefically the same motive against the deceased which his brother had and the entire group of accused had planned to eliminate the deceased it was not required to specifically allege against each accused that he had that motive. It was submitted that the benefit of doubt given to accused of conspiracy could be availed of only by those accused who had been acquitted but the prosecution case to the extent of appellant was not affected in any manner. It was submitted that the prosecution case was fully proved by the witnesses-who--- were naturally present and their testimony was supported by other evidence and since it was pre-planned cold blooded murder, the convict did not deserve any leniency.
12. Conspiracy is an intrigue or scheme which germinates in the dark alleys of sinister minds and comes to light only when its external results are known. Direct evidence for hatching of conspiracy is hard to come by and it is proved by indirect evidence which can falter and may not result in conviction of the conspirators. But it would be seen that happening of an event or existence of a state of affairs is one thing and proving at a subsequent stage the particular manner in which it had happened or had prevailed, are altogether different things. Non-proving of conspiracy through sufficient evidence of acceptable legal standard would never mean that such an event had not taken place. In this case Nawaz brother of the convict a school teacher got arrested in a case under Arms Ordinance and came out of lock-up after the occurrence, the choice of time and manner in which the design was accomplished do allude to the fact that the occurrence was not simply the prank of an individual. Therefore, the argument advanced on behalf of the convict in this regard may have some semantic value but is of no legal consequence. The complainant was not required to explicitly assign motive to each of the accused mentioned in the F.I.R . He had assigned the motive to a group of people and for all practical purposes he had ascribed the motive to the individuals who formed that group. Even at the trial , the defence itself made a suggestion to Sultan complainant, P.W.6 to which he gave the reply "I cannot say that he (deceased) did not have illicit relations with Mst. Maqsood Bibi." The defence highlighted the motive itself and the failure of the conspiracy theory, therefore, does not have any bearing on the case of the present appellant.
13. The argument of the learned counsel for the appellant that availability of the brothers and husband of Mst. Maqsood Bibi had obviated any need for the appellant to have committed the murder of Zafar Iqbal, does not carry much weight. The capacity, willingness and ability of one who would be more capable to bell the cat could have led to his choice. Another factor was that in case of the assailant/assailants having gone unnoticed, few fingers would have pointed towards the convict. It is a matter of common knowledge that insult, of one member of the family or of clan is considered to be an outrage against all the members of that extended family and, therefore, anyone of them or more daredevil of them can take on himself the responsibility of vindicating the family honour. The argument advanced on behalf of the convict is specious and we have not been impressed by that.
14. The failure of the prosecution to prove satisfactorily its case against all the accused would not cloud its case against the convict. As observed above the conspiracy is not easy to prove and since other accused who had statingly accompanied the convict had not wisely taken part in the shooting--their target obviously was the deceased, they were entitled to benefit of doubt being extended to them for reason of safe administration of justice.
15. The occurrence in this case had taken place inside the house of the complainant where he was present. Likewise sister of deceased was also present in her father's house. Nothing was suggested to them to the effect that they were present elsewhere. Correctness of site plan Exh. PC was nowhere challenged. Similarly the Investigating Officer was not accused of having changed the spot of occurrence. Muhammad Aslam P.W.8 was a next door neighbour of the complainant. All the witnesses were present at or near the spot. The occurrence took place at 4-00 a.m. In August. The Medical Officer also gave the same time and his opinion in this regard was assailed. The deceased had fired at the deceased from a short distance and had gone deeply into the haveli, therefore, his detection or establishment of his identity were not at all questionable. The testimony of Sultan P.W.6 and of Mst. Mumtaz P.W.7 is unequivocal and straightforward. The defence had tried to kick up a little dust by suggesting that former husband of Mst Mumtaz or one Shera might have committed the offence. Former husband of Mst Mumtaz was not shown to be having any grudge against the deceased and Shera had settled the dispute with the complainant party. The convict and his family had no enmity with the complainant party. It has not been shown as why the convict was picked out of the crowd to be branded as murderer of Zafar Iqbal.
16. We have meticulously examined the record in the light of submissions made at the bar and are of the view that the prosecution had successfully proved its case against the convict appellant on the basis of evidence led at the trial. It was a savage and cold blooded murder committed on the self-supposed insult caused to the family. The appellant was rightly convicted for the murder of Zafar Iqbal, deceased and sentence awarded to him was well-warranted.
17. The Criminal Appeal No, 325 of 1991 is consequently, dismissed.
18. The Criminal Revision Petition No,247 of 1991 is considered to be without much substance and is dismissed.
19. Murder reference is answered in the affirmative.