EJAZ AFZAL KHAN, J.---The appellant herein assailed the judgment and order dated 21-2-1998 of the learned Sessions Judge, Karak whereby he sentenced him to undergo imprisonment for life with a fine of one lack or in default to suffer further two years' S.I. In a case registered against him and his acquitted co-accused under section 302/34, P.P.C. Vide F.I.R. No,162 dated 20-11-1995 in the Police Station Sabir Abad.
2. The facts, as set-forth in the F.I.R. Are that on the date of occurrence, the deceased Umar Badshah, went to a cattle fair in order to-purchase something and after doing the needful when he, while proceeding towards his house, reached near the shop of Mehraban Shah, where the appellant alongwith his brother, namely, Arshad the acquitted co-accused, standing duly armed fired at the deceased who on being hit, fell on the ground and died. The occurrence was witnessed by Islam Gul, the father of the deceased, who was following him at the relevant time. The motive for the occurrence was that the appellant wanted the deceased to divorce his wife as the acquitted co-accused Arshad was interested to marry her. On the report of the father of the deceased the case mentioned above was registered.
3. P.W.8 Israr Khan, A.S.-I., after the registration of the case mentioned above, prepared injury-sheet Exh.PM/1, inquest report Exh.PM/2, dispatched the dead body of the deceased to the Civil Hospital, Sabir Abad for its post-mortem examination under the escort of Rahim Badshah, F.C., proceeded to the spot, prepared the site plan Exh.PB at the instance of Islam Gul P.W., took into possession blood- stained pebbles and earth P/1 and one empty-shell of '30 bore P-2 vide recovery Memos. Exh.PC and Ex.PC/1 in the presence of marginal witnesses and then handed over the investigation to the S.H.O.
4. On the completion of the investigation, the appellant was forwarded to the Court of the learned Sessions Judge, Karak for trial.
5. On being charged when the appellant pleaded not guilty, the prosecution examined as many as nine witnesses to prove the case against him.
6. P.W.1 Rahim Badshah, F.C. Escorted the dead body of the deceased to the Hospital, brought the post-mortem documents and handed them over to the Investigating Officer. P.W.2 Islam Roshan and P.W.3 Saleh Muhammad identified the dead body of the deceased in the police station and at the time of post-mortem examination respectively. P.W.4 Awal Khan, S.H.O. Submitted supplementary challan against the appellant. P.W.5 Zafar Iqbal, Medical Officer, Civil Hospital, Karak conducted the post-mortem examination on the dead body of the deceased and on external.
Examination found a wound about 1/3" in diameter on the chin about 1/2" to the left of midline (wound of entrance), with blackening over an area of about 3" in diameter around the wound and on internal examination scalp, skull, thorax and abdomen intact while vertebrae, spinal card including muscles and bones injured: In the opinion of the Doctor the cause of death was fire-arm injuries damaging the various organs of the body including spinal card. The probable time between injury and death was instantaneous and death and post-mortem was within about three hours." P W.6 Abdur Rauf, D.F.C. Searched the appellant far and near in the village and its adjoining hamlets and after having been entrusted with proclamation notice pasted a copy thereof on the notice board of the Court and another on the outer door of the house of the appellant. P.W.7 Islam Gul furnished the ocular account of the incident as detailed above. P.W.8 Israr Khan, A.S.-I.Partially investigated the case as described above and sent blood-stained pebbles and earth to the Chemical Examiner for analysis and on receipt of his report placed it on the file which is Exh.P.F.
P.W.9 Javed Khan, S.H.O. Initiated the proceedings under sections 204 and 87 of the Cr.P.C. Against the appellant and after his arrest forwarded him to the Court of learned Sessions Judge for trial.
7. On the close of the prosecution evidence the statement of the appellant was recorded under section 342 of the Cr.P.C. Wherein he professed innocence and denied his involvement in the commission of the crime.
8. On the completion of the trial the learned Sessions Judge sentenced the appellant as mentioned above.
9. On being aggrieved by the judgment and order of the learned Sessions Judge, the appellant assailed his conviction by filing this appeal in this Court.
10. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant contended that it is a case of blind and unwitnessed occurrence. He next contended that the only eye-witness examined by the prost action is the father of the deceased who is highly interested and carmo, be relied upon in a case involving capital punishment. He further contended that it is not safe to rely upon the evidence of a solitary interested witness which is in conflict with the medical evidence. He by concluding his arguments contended that when the same evidence has been disbelieved qua the acquitted co- accused, no implicit reliance can be placed on the same unless it is corroborated by the evidence of the witnesses of unquestionable integrity particularly when one of the Investigating Officers found this case to be a case of unwitnessed crime in his progress report.
11. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the State contended that the appellant is charged in a promptly lodged F.I.R. And in the absence of any motive to falsely implicate him there is no reason to discard or disbelieve his testimony, when the account furnished by the solitary eye- witness stood the test of stern and searching cross-examination. He next contended that the abscondence of the appellant would give added strength to the testimony of the P. Ws. He by summing up his arguments contended that the judgment of the learned trial Judge is based on proper appraisal of evidence which needs no interference in appeal.
12. We have carefully considered the arguments of the learned counsel for the appellant and learned State Counsel and have perused the record with their assistance. No doubt it is a case of a solitary witness but the testimony of a solitary witness itself is not a demerit or disqualification as can call for its repudiation when otherwise it rings true and inspires confidence. The argument that the eye-witness being the father of the deceased is highly interested cannot be relied upon is not tenable both legally and logically in the absence of any defect in its intrinsic probative worth and in the absence of any motive on his part to falsely implicate the appellant. The argument of the learned counsel for the appellant that the medical evidence is in conflict with the ocular testimony as the blackening around the entry wound on the person of the deceased would show that he was fired at from a close range whereas according to the ocular account and the site plan the deceased was fired at from a distance of four paces would be devoid of any force as the blackening has been held to have been introduced later on through an overwriting in the post- mortem report by the trial Court and rightly so, as the overwriting thereon is writ large on the face of it. Apart from' this, the abscondence of the appellant in the given circumstances of the case will go a long way to corroborate the prosecution evidence and point to the B involvement of the appellant in the crime when the same has not been plausibly explained. Besides this, the defence has not projected even through insinuation about the innocence of the appellant or involvement of some other person in the commission of the crime.
13. The argument that the prosecution evidence has been disbelieved qua the involvement of the acquitted co-accused, therefore, no implicit reliance can be placed on the same unless it is corroborated by the evidence of the witnesses of unquestionable integrity would have held some force if the role assigned to him would have been similar to that of the appellant but when no significant role has been given to the acquitted co-accused, then this argument will be of no legal consequence.
14. About the much stressed opinion of one of the Investigating Officers that it was a blind and unwitnessed crime, suffice it to say that it was nothing but a concession made by him to favour the appellant under some obligation. Where is the original of this report, why it was not brought on the record and if at all the appellant was found innocent, why he was not released by the Investigating Officer under section 169 of the Cr.P.C. Are the questions which have not been satisfactorily answered by the learned counsel for the appellant. The absence of original and availability of photostat copy on the record would prove nothing but spurious origin of this report which cannot be taken as a proof of the innocence of the appellant when otherwise the charge against him stands proved to the hilt.
15. For the foregoing reasons we do not find any infirmity or defect in the judgment of the learned trial Judge which is thus upheld. However, the words 'fine' are substituted with the words 'compensation' which if realised shall be given to the legal heirs of the deceased, or in default he is to undergo further six months' S.I. Instead of two years' S.I. With this modification, the appeal is dismissed.