1974 P Cr (PLP)

(1) An incised wound 1 x ' x bone cut on the right side of the head, 1-1/3 above right ear. (2) An incised would 3' x 8' x mandible cut on the right cheek, 2' in front of right ear. (3) An incised would 1 ' x ' x wound cut and fractured on the right temple. (4) An incised would 3' x 8' x mandible cut on the right side 1' below injury No. 2. (5) An incised wound 5' x 4' x mandible wound cut just above chin. (6) An abrasion ' x 8' below the chin. (7) Three liner abrasion ' x 1/8 ' each in 1' x 1' area on the gap of left hand. (8) Three linear abrasions ' x 1/8 ' each in 1' x 1' area on the back of left forearm just above wrist joint ulna bone fractured. (9) Two contused wounds 2' x 1/8' x bone deep on the outturn and inner side of left elbow‑joint. Right temporal, frontal and right parietal bone were fractured. There was a cut on the bone under injury No.

1. The membrane and the brain were congested and were crushed on the right side. There was also a cut under injury No. I.

6. In the opinion of the doctor, death was due to shock sad haemor rhage. Injuries Nos. 1 and 3 were sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. Injuries Nos. 1 to 5 and 8 were grievous. Injuries Nos. 6, 7 and 9 were caused with a blunt weapon while the remaining injuries were caused by a sharp‑edged weapon.

7. The accused denied guilt and ascribed the caste to enmity. Nawab Din accused denied that his relations with the deceased were strained. Muhammad Rafiq and Muhammad Latif accused, however, admitted that their relations were strained with the deceased and his brothers, over the turn of water. The accused did not produce any evidence in defence.

8. There are only two eye‑witnesses and both are the brothers of they deceased. Many people were admittedly present in the vicinity of the Behak, but none turned up in response to the alarm raised by the witnesses. Their evidence about the use of a sharp‑edged weapon by each accused is belied by medical evidence which shows that the deceased had two contused wounds, and seven abrasives also. Their story that when they went towards the accused, the latter ran towards their dera without giving them a single blow is not convincing. Muhammad Siddique deceased had not taken any prominent part in the dispute between the parties and it is not clear why he was selected for murder. As the complainant party had a house in the village, all the three brothers were not likely to have stayed away from there every night. Since their object of staying at the behak at night was to guard the cattle, they were not likely to be without any weapon. As stated above, no one came to the spot during or after the occurrence. It was only in the morning that Muhammad Khan went and brought the Lambardar. The explanation of the eye‑witnesses that they did not leave the behak for informing people in the village or in the vicinity because they were afraid of the accused, is not plausible because they were disposed to a greater danger at the behak than if they bad gone out to seek help and shelter elsewhere. It appears that Muhammad Siddique deceased was probably sleeping alone at the behak then taking advantage of a dark and cloudy night, he was killed by some unknown assailants. No one came to the spot from the vicinity probably because there was nobody at the behak to raise an alarm The story of the eye‑witneses that they stayed at the behak till early next morning seems to have been invented to meet the argument that the murder was not reported earlier because it was discovered next morning when people started moving about. The possibility of the implication of the accused on account of mere suspicion cannot be ruled out.

9. The alleged production of weapons by the accused did not materially, advance he prosecution case. These weapons were not stained with blood and they are said to have been produced four days after the occurrence.

10. As the case against the accused is not free from doubt, we accept their appeal and acquit them. Their conviction and sentences are set aside. The sentences of death are not confirmed. Appeal allowed.