1. ' This judgment will dispose of Criminal Appeal No,924 of 1994 filed by Muhammad Ijaz, appellant, who was convicted under section 302(b), P.P.C. And sentenced to imprisonment for life by learned Sessions Judge, Khushab vide judgment, dated 16-10-1996. Criminal Revision No,332 of 1997 filed by Muhammad Mumtaz, complainant for enhancement of sentence of the convict shall also be disposed of through this single judgment.
2. Occurrence in this case had taken place at 6-15 p.m. On 21-8-1995 at a distance of one kilometer from Police Station Katha Sagral District Khushab while the matter was reported by Muhammad Mumtaz at 8-45 p.m. The same night and the formal F.I.R. Exh.P.B. Was recorded by Ghulam Jafar, S.-I.
3. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that Muhammad Ijaz was suspecting illicit relations of Muhammad Iqbal (deceased) with his sister Mst. Amna. On 21-8-1995 at about 6-15 p.m.
2. Muhammad Iqbal came out of his flour mill which was adjacent to the house of Ijaz, appellant.
3. Sooner did Iqbal came out of floor mill, allegedly appellant fired at him with his .30 bore pistol after raising Lalkara towards him. The fire hit Muhammad lqbal at the back of his shoulder. The occurrence was witnessed by the complainant, Muhammad Ijaz real brother of Iqbal (deceased) and their maternal-uncle Muhammad Afzal. After receiving the pistol shot Muhammad Iqbal fell down on the ground. He was taken to hospital but later on died at about 8-05 p.m. The same night.
4. ' After registration of the formal F.I.R. Ghulam Jaffar, S.-I. (P.W.8) proceeded to hospital, prepared injury statement Exh.P.G., inquest report Exh.P.H. Of the dead body of Muhammad Iqbal, then visited the place of occurrence, took into possession blood-stained earth vide memo. Exh.P.D. Prepared site plan of the place of occurrence Exh.P.K on 22-8-1995 took into possession last-worn clothes of the deceased vide memo. Exh.P.A. Site plans Exhs.P.J. Anc' P.J./1 were got prepared by him, on 31-8- 1995 arrested Muhammad Ijaz who on 2-9-1995 led to the recovery of P.4. Which was taken into possession vide memo. Exh.P.C. And after completion of, the investigation, challaned the accused to face the trial.
5. ' At the trial, prosecution in order to prove its case produced 9 witnesses in all, then the learned D.D.A. Tendered in evidence report of the Chemical Examiner Exh.P.L., report of the Serologist Exh.P.M.
6. And closed the prosecution case. Thereafter, statement of the appellant was recorded under section 342, Cr.P.C. In which he took the plea of grave and sudden provocation. After conclusion of the trial, the appellant was convicted and sentenced as stated above.
7. ' Learned counsel for the appellant after having read the entire prosecution evidence and statement of the appellant under section 342, Cr.P.C. Submits that both the eye-witnesses are closely related to the deceased, story of the prosecution itself is that the appellant had suspected that the deceased had illicit relations with sister of the appellant, the injury on the person of the deceased was on the backside, had there been any previous enmity, the appellant could have challenged the deceased and hit the fire from the front and that the appellant had taken a specific plea in his statement under section 342, Cr.P.C. Which he proved. Learned counsel lastly submits that in fact no case under section 302(b), P.P.C. Is made out and if any case is made out that can be at the most under section 302(c), P. P.C.
8. ' Learned counsel for the State assisted by learned counsel for the complainant submits that the appellant is single accused, blood-stained earth was taken into possession not from the house of the appellant, different suggestions were given to the witnesses, on the one hand it was stated that the appellant had seen the deceased kissing and embracing his sister while on the other hand it was suggested that gestures were being made to Amna, already a lenient view had been taken by the learned trial Court, they both support the judgment of the learned trial Court.
9. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the entire evidence brought on record. In the F.I.R., motive given by the prosecution is that the appellant had suspicion that the deceased had illicit relations with his sister. During the cross-examination of P.Ws. 5 and 6 ft has come on record that the mother of the appellant had gone to the house of the deceased's mother with the grievance that the deceased should be prohibited/stopped from coming to her house and in case the deceased was not stopped, the appellant would kill him. This fact has been admitted by Muhammad Mumtaz (P.W.4) real brother of the deceased. Only one shot was fired which hit on the backside of the deceased. If there was any previous enmity, the appellant must have fired at the deceased from the front side. The Investigating Officer (P.W.8) in his cross-examination has admitted that in his first version the appellant had taken the plea that the deceased was making jestures with his sister Mst. Amna. The Investigating Officer also admitted the fact that the mother of the appellant had gone to the mother of the deceased to stop her son from visiting the house of the appellant. From the overall facts and circumstances of the case, it is clear that something has happened which provoked the appellant 'at the time of occurrence. It is also proved from the evidence that the deceased was hit by the appellant when he tried to run away because the injury was on the backside.
10. Taking into consideration the defence plea taken by the appellant, admission on the part of the P.Ws. For having forbidden the deceased not to come to the house of the appellant and the motive given by the prosecution itself, I am of the considered view that the case of the appellant is not covered under section 302(b). P.P.C. But in fact falls under section 302(c), P.P.C. Accordingly, by holding the case of the appellant having fallen under section 302(c), P.P.C. I reduce his sentence from imprisonment for life to 10 years' R.I. With the benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C. The appellant is in jail and shall be released forthwith, if not required to be detained in any other case. In case if he has undergone this sentence. Criminal appeal filed by the convict appellant is dismissed by