' MUHAMMAD NAWAZ ABBASI, J.--- The appellant namely Niaz Ali son of Jan Muhammad alongwith his real brother Gulab Khan was tried for the charge under section 302/34, P.P.C. In a case F.I.R.
No,322, dated 4-10-1992 registered at Police Station Sarai Alamgir by the learned Sessions Judge, Jhelum, for committing the murder of Muhammad Bashir. The learned trial Judge having found him guilty of the charge convicted and sentenced him to death under section 302, P.P.C. Through judgment, dated 11-12-1994. Gulab Khan was, however, acquitted from the charge.
2. The appellant has challenged his conviction and sentence through Criminal Appeal No,158 of 1994 whereas Najabat Ali complainant of the case has filed Criminal Revision No,42 of 1995 for setting aside the acquittal of Gulab Khan and for the payment of compensation to the legal heirs of the deceased under section 544-A, Cr.P.C. The trial Court has sent Murder Reference No,2 of 1995 under section 374, Cr.P.C. For confirmation of death sentence awarded to the appellant. The criminal appeal and criminal revision alongwith murder reference are disposed of through this single judgment.
3. Najabat Ali P.W.9 the first informant, made a statement Exh.P.C. At the Police Station Sarai Alamgir on the basis of which F.I.R. Exh.P.C./1 was chalked out which contained the following facts:-- "On 4-10-1992 at about Degarvela Najabat Ali complainant alongwith Muhammad Afzal son of Rajwali, and Muhammad Bashir deceased were proceeding towards their Deras with their cattle and when they reached near Pabbi suddenly Niaz Ali and Gulab Khan sons of Jan Muhammad armed with hatchets appeared at the scene raising Lalkaras that Muhammad Bashir would not be spared on that day. Simultaneously Niaz Ali with blunt side of the hatchet gave blow to Muhammad Bashir on his head within the sight of the complainant and his companions namely Muhammad Afzal and Ghulam. The complainant immediately took the deceased in an injured condition to T.H.Q. Hospital, Kharian for treatment. The motive behind the occurrence as narrated in the F.I.R.
Was that about a year earlier a quarrel took place between Muhammad Bashir and Noor Ali which was settled at the Brotheri level but Niaz Ali and Gulab Khan nephew of said Noor Ali having developed grudge were revengeful and for same reason attacked on Muhammad Bashir."
4. Initially the case was registered under section 324/337-A(ii)/34, P.P.C. But later on the death of Muhammad Bashir in Hospital section 302, P.P.C. Was added. Arif Hussain Shah, S.-I. After recording the. Statement Exh.P.C. Of the complainant sent the same to police station for registration of case through a constable and accordingly a case was registered through F.I.R. Exh.P.C./1 on the same day. The S.-I. On the next day of occurrence, on receipt of information about the death of Muhammad Bashir reached in .The hospital and prepared inquest report Exh.P.J. And injury statement Exh.P.F. Of Muhammad Bashir deceased and handed over the dead body to Gulzar Hussain, Constable for post-mortem examination. Arif Hussain Shah, S.-I. During the spot inspection collected blood-stained earth in a sealed parcel through memo. Exh.P.G. And also prepared rough site plan Exh.P.K. Of the place of occurrence. He recorded the statements of the witnesses under section 161, Cr.P.C. And took into possession the last-worn clothes of the deceased through memo.
Exh.P.A. Which were sent to the Moharrir of the police station to be kept in safe custody and got prepared the site plan Exh.P.L. And Exh.P.L./1 of the place of occurrence from a draftsman on the pointation of the witnesses. He arrested Niaz Ali accused on 16-10-1992 and on 25-10-1992, said accused in presence of Shah Muhammad and Muhammad Malik, while in police custody, led to the recovery of hatchet P.5 from his residential house which was taken into possession vide memo.
Exh.P.B. And also prepared rough site plan Exh.P.B./1 of the place of recovery of hatchet. At the conclusion of the investigation, the Investigating Officer after declaring Gulab Khan as innocent placed him in column No,2 of the final report and challaned the appellant to face the trial.
5. The prosecution produced twelve witnesses in all in support of the charge. Muhammad Malik, a police constable P.W.1 took the sealed parcels of case property to the office of the Chemical Examiner, Lahore, Gulzar Hussain, H.C. P.W.2 was handed over the dead body of Muhammad Bashir for post-mortem examination who produced the last-worn clothes of the deceased after post- mortem examination before Arif Hussain Shah, S.-I. Nighat Mahmood P.W.3 identified the dead body of Muhammad Bashir. Shah Muhammad P.W,4 and Muhammad Malik P.W.5 are the witnesses of the recovery of hatchet P.S. Muhammad Asghar, H.C. P.W.6 on receipt of the complaint Exh.P.C.
Prepared the formal F.I.R. Exh.P.C./1 and kept the sealed parcel of the blood-stained earth in Police Malkhana in safe custody. P.W.7 Dr. Muhammad Farooq Bangash, Medical Officer, T.H.Q. Hospital, Kharian, District Gujrat conducted the medical examination of Muhammad Bashir on 4-10-1992 P.W.8 Dr. S. Ali Muhammad, Medical Officer, T.H.Q. Hospital, Kharian conducted autopsy on the dead body of Muhammad Bashir on the next day of the fateful incident. P.W.9 Najabat Ali and P.W.10 Muhammad Afzal are the eye-witnesses of the occurrence. P.W.11 Arif Hussain Shah investigated the case and P.W.12 Akhtar Naqqash, Draftsmen, prepared the site plan.
6. Dr. Muhammad Farooq Bangash P.W.7 medically examined Muhammad Bashir in an injured condition and observed the following injury on his person:- "A lacerated wound 5 c.m. x 3/4 c.m. x bone deep on the back of head. The condition of the patient was serious. The injury was caused with blunt weapon and its duration was 6 hours."
7. Dr. S. Ali Muhammad P.W.8 conducted autopsy on the dead body of Muhammad Bashir and found the following injury:-- "lacerated wound 5 c.m x 3/4 c.m. Into deep on the back of head."
' Dr. Has opined that the injury was caused with blunt weapon, which was sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature.
8. Najabat Ali complainant P.W.9 and Muhammad Afzal P.W.10 have furnished the ocular account of the prosecution case and the motive behind the occurrence. The witnesses while repeating the story of the F.I.R. Have corroborated each other on each material point with no describable contradiction or discrepancy. They have categorically stated that Niaz Ali inflicted blow with blunt side of the hatchet on the head of Muhammad Bashir, who fell down on the ground and that while they were taking Muhammad Bashir to the hospital, they met Arif Hussain Shah, S.-I. Who recorded the statement Exh.P.C. Of Najabat Ali complainant. The presence of the witnesses who are closely related to the deceased near the place of occurrence with their cattle at some distance from their Deras was quite natural, therefore, their presence near the place of occurrence was beyond doubt.
The witnesses although are closely related to the deceased but they have no enmity against the accused and have direct knowledge of the quarrel of the deceased with Noor Ali and the feelings of the accused against the deceased. The appellant in his statement under section 342, Cr.P.C.
While denying the charge has pleaded false implication and innocence.
9. The fateful occurrence Wok place in the broad daylight within the sight of the P.Ws. At some distance from their Deras. They have stated that the deceased was caused an injury with blunt side of the hatchet on the back of head. Doctor has found the single injury on the persons of the deceased as described by the witness.
10. Learned counsel for the appellant without contesting this appeal on merits argued that since the appellant is a young man and had no direct motive against the deceased except that he while developing grudge against the deceased of the insult of his maternal-uncle caused him a single injury which proved fatal and in view of this background, it was not a case of extreme penalty of death.
11. Learned counsel representing the State has not been able to point any special circumstances to show that it was not a case of lesser penalty.
12. We having heard the learned counsel for the parties and gone through the evidence find that the appellant while nursing a grudge against the deceased for insult of his maternal-uncle inflicted a single blow to the deceased which proved fatal and despite having opportunity did not cause further blow to the deceased. The appellant being a young man having no patience to tolerate the insult of his maternal-uncle by the deceased took extreme step of causing such a fatal injury to the deceased. We, therefore, in view of the circumstances under which the occurrence took place find some mitigation in favour of the appellant in the matter of sentence. Thus, we while altering the sentence of death awarded to Niaz Ali appellant into imprisonment for life under section 302(b), P.P.C. Dismiss his appeal and answer the murder reference in negative.
13. For the foregoing reasons, we do not find any substance in the criminal revision filed by Najabat Ali complainant, which is accordingly dismissed, to the extent of acquittal of Gulab Khan respondent. However, on conviction in such cases, the payment of compensation is mandatory under section 544-A, Cr.P.C. We, therefore, allow criminal revision to the extent of payment of compensation and direct that the appellant shall pay Rs,50,000 as compensation to the legal heirs of the deceased and in default of the payment of compensation, he will suffer S.I. For six months and the compensation shall be recovered from him as arrears of land revenue. With the above modification in the sentence, Criminal Appeal No,158 of 1994 filed by Niaz Ali appellant and Criminal Revision No,42 of 1995 are dismissed. The death sentence is not confirmed and the murder reference is answered in the negative. revisions by the competent authorities. Therefore, it is advisable to consult the official sources or legal professionals for the most up-to-date and accurate information.