' ZAFAR PASHA CHAUDHARY, J.---This judgment will dispose of Murder Reference No,155 of 1996, Criminal Appeal No,129 of 1996 as well as Criminal Revision No,456 of 1996. Criminal Appeal No,129 of 1996 has been filed on behalf of Muhammad Aslam and Muhammad Akram convicts challenging their conviction and sentence whereas Criminal Revision No,456 of 1996 has been filed by Zaheer complainant praying for enhancement of life imprisonment to death awarded to Muhammad Akram.
2. The prosecution case as reflected from the statement of Zaheer Ahmad complainant P.W.9 as detailed in para. No,2 of the judgment is that his brother Khadim Hussain and sister's husband Saleem purchased residential plot measuring one Kanal from one Fateh Ali Mehr situated in village Banian, which was bounded with four-walls. According to the complainant towards the southern side of the plot there is a land measuring 7 Marlas belonging to Shamlat which was occupied by Muhammad Akram etc., and that when the complainant party started trying to take the land, ultimately the committee of the village took Rs,10,000 from them and paid the same to Muhammad Akram, etc. Who vacated the plot, however, Muhammad Akram, etc felt annoyed over the vacating of the plot and due to this grudge Muhammad Akram while armed with Churri, Muhammad Aslam armed with 12 bore gun, Muhammad Ashraf armed with Danda in furtherance of their common intention were present in their home, when the complainant alongwith his brother came out of their home in order to go to their shop. According to the complainant when they reached near the house of Muhammad Ashraf in the chowk of the street, all of a sudden, all the three accused while catching hold of Khadim Hussain, brother of the complainant laid him on the ground and on the lalkara of Mst. Noor Begum, they started beating him. Muhammad Akram gave Churri blows on the head of Khadim Hussain, brother of the complainant. Muhammad Aslam gave a 12 bore gun shot on the back of Khadim Hussain, while he was in a fallen position. According to the complainant he continued raising hue and cry, when his brother Sagheer Ahmed also reached there on hearing the alarm. Muhammad Ashraf picked up the rifle 222-belonging to Khadim and when the accused started firing on the complainant and his companions, they while running entered into the house of Raja Allah Ditta and went on the roof top of the said house. Sagheer Ahmad was also injured. On hearing the reports of the fire shots, many persons gathered to the spot, whereon accused persons went to their house, and their mother had exhorted his sons. The complainant took Khadim and Sagheer Ahmad, his brothers to Aziz Bhatti Shaheed Hospital, Gujrat where Khadim Hussain succumbed to the injuries.
3. The investigation was taken up by the Munawar Hussain Bhatti Inspector S.H.O. P.W.11 who on completion of the same sent up Muhammad Aslam, Muhammad Akram, Muhammad Ashraf and Mst. Noor Begum to face trial. The learned trial Judge on conclusion of the trial held Muhammad Aslam and Muhammad Akram guilty. Muhammad Aslam was convicted under sections 302/34, P.P.C. And sentenced to death, with a fine of Rs,25,000, also compensation of Rs,25,000 to be paid to the heirs of the deceased, in default of each to further undergo R.I. For six months each.
Muhammad Akram was also convicted under sections 302/34, P.P.C., however, he was sentenced to imprisonment for life, with a fine of Rs,25,000 and a compensation of Rs,25,000, in default whereof to further undergo S.I. For six months each. The remaining two co-accused Muhammad Ashraf and Mst. Noor Begum were acquitted by giving them the benefit of doubt.
4. The prosecution examined 12 witnesses in support of its case, out of them Zaheer Ahmad complainant P.W.9 and Sagheer Ahmad P.W.10 furnished the eye-witness account of the occurrence. Both the witnesses made similar statements as already made by Zaheer Ahmad complainant vide Exh.P.J., before the Inspector S.H.O. On the basis of which the formal F.I.R. Was recorded.
5. Dr. Tahir Rasheed (P.W.8), Dr. Malik Abid Mehmood (P.W.13) and Dr. Ghulam Abbas (P.W.14) furnished the medical evidence. Gulzar Ahmad P.W.5 attested the recovery of 222-rifle from Muhammad Ashraf, Muhammad Akram led to the recovery of Churri P.6 Exh.P.F. And Muhammad Aslam accused got recovered gun P.7 from his house which was secured into possession vide memo. Exh.P.G.
6. On close of the prosecution case, the appellant were examined under section 342, Cr.P.C., wherein, they denied the allegations against them. Muhammad Akram explained that in fact the fight took place as the complainant party wanted to forcibly occupy the land Shamlat Deh, whereon village proprietory body was attached to the place of occurrence and they stopped the complainant from raising constructions. As the deceased did not agree, therefore, injuries were caused by the members of the village proprietory body. During the course of firing by the village proprietory body, the deceased Khadim Hussain received injuries and succumbed to the same subsequently.
7. Muhammad Aslam appellant also made a similar statement. The learned trial Judge as noted above relying upon the testimony of eye-witnesses, medical evidence, recoveries and report of Forensic Science Laboratory, convicted and sentenced the appellant as noted above.
8. Muhammad Aslam appellant who had been sentenced to death was reported to have died during his confinement in jail. The learned counsel for the appellants as well as for the complainant and State also endorse the same fact. A copy of the Treatment Sheet of Muhammad Aslam and its registration with the Registrar of death dated 29-4-2001 has been submitted and placed on the file.
Apart from that the learned counsel for the State was asked to further confirm from the jail authorities whether Muhammad Aslam had really died. The learned counsel has confirmed the same again from the jail authorities. According to the learned counsel for the appellant, this appeal to his extent stands abated. It is further submitted that he had no property from where the amount of compensation or fine could be realized, therefore, we dispose of the appeal to the extent of Muhammad Aslam as having been abated.
9. Coming to the case of Muhammad Akram, we have gone through the evidence with the help of the learned counsel for the appellant as well as for the prosecution and find that Muhammad Akram's conviction is based on trust worthy and credible evidence and he has rightly been convicted. Even otherwise, the learned counsel for the appellant has not laid much stress for his acquittal, rather he addressed arguments in rebuttal to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the complainant that his sentence should not be enhanced and the same may be maintained as such.
10. We have examined the reasons assigned by the learned trial Judge for award of lesser punishment and find that the manner in which the occurrence took place as a result of dispute with regard to the possession of piece of land, the incident appears to be result of a flare up which took place suddenly and, therefore, imposition of lesser sentence i,e, imprisonment for life to Muhammad Akram is supported by 'the circumstances as emerged from there prosecution case itself. We accordingly do not find much force in the Revision, the same is dismissed. Consequently the Criminal Appeal No,129 of 1996 to the extent of Muhammad Akram is dismissed and appeal to the extent of Muhammad Aslam stands abated. Benefit of S.382-B is also extended to Muhammad Akram, appellant.
11. As Muhammad Aslam has expired in Jail and his Appeal stands abated, there remains no question of confirming his death or passing any verdict on Murder Reference. Murder Reference is disposed of in above terms.