1987 PLP 935 (MLD)

(6) A stab wound 1 " x " x abdomen deep on the back of abdomen left side, renal angle, muscles, and spleen were cut, abdomen was full of blood. (7) A stab wound 2" x " x muscle deep, 1 " from injury No. 6 outer side. (8) A stab wound 1 " x " x muscle deep on the front of left upper arm, 5" below the shoulder. (9) Incised wound 1 "" x 3/4" x bone deep on the outer side of left shoulder. (10) Incised wound 1 " x " x muscle deep on the inner and back of left wrist and hand. (11) A stab wound 1-3/4" x " x lung deep on the outer side of left chest, 4" below and outer side of left nipple. Injury went into the chest between 7th and 8th ribs. Left lung was injured. Left chest was full of blood. Shirt and vest and Shalwar were cut and blood-stained against injuries of chest, abdomen and upper limbs.

5. In the opinion of the Medical Officer, the death occurred due to shock and haemorrhage caused by injuries Nos. 4, 6 and

11. Injuries Nos. 1, 2, 3, 5 and 7 to 10 were simple. All the injuries were ante-mortem and inflicted with sharp-edged and pointed weapon. Injuries Nos.4, 6 and 11 were sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. The probable time that elapsed between the injuries and the death was within a few minutes and between the death and the post-mortem examination within 24 hours. Exh . P. C . is the post-mortem examination report and Exh.P.C/1 is the diagram showing the locale of the injuries.

6. The above Medical Officer on the same date at 12-00 noon performed the post-mortem examination on the dead body of Mst. Haleeman deceased and observed the following injuries:

(1) An incised wound 2" x " x muscle deep on the back of left upper arm 3 " above the elbow joint. (2) A stab wound 2" x " x chest deep on the outer side of left chest, below the axilla 5 " from left nipple and going into pleural cavity between 7th and 8th ribs. Left lung was cut. Left chest was full of blood, diaphram was also cut. (3) A stab wound 1-3/4" x 1" x abdomen and kidney deep on the outer side of abdomen, left side 5 " from umbilicus. Wound went into the abdomen injuring the large intestiners, stomach and left kidney. Abdomen was, full, of blood and food and faeces; corresponding parts of shirt and vest were cut and bloodstained.

6. In the opinion of the Medical Officer, the cause of death was shock and haemorrhage due to injuries Nos.2 and 3 which were sufficient to cause death in the ordinary course of nature. Injury No.1 was simple. The injuries were ante-mortem and had been caused by a sharp pointed weapon. The probable interval between the injuries and the death was within a few minutes and between the death and the post-mortem examination within 24 hours. Exh.P.B is the post-mortem examination report and Exh.P. B. /1 is the diagram showing the locale of the injuries.

7. The Medical Officer stated in his cross-examination that the death of the two deceased could occur within 5 to 10 minutes of the infliction of the injuries.

8. The appellant pleaded not guilty to the charge under section 302, P.P.C on two counts for the murder of the two deceased. When examined under section 342, Cr.P.C., he denied the prosecution case and the recovery of blood-stained dagger P.1 ascribed to him. He owned the shirt P.2 and Chaddar P.3, but according to him they were stained with blood subsequently. While pleading innocence, he narrated the occurrence as follows:- "I had been living in the house of Mst. Zainab deceased for complete 9/10 years as Ghar Damad and was engaged with Mst. Zainab alias Rani and during this period I had been supporting the family of the deceased. Thereafter, I was turned out of the house of the deceased. Subsequently, Mst. Zainab deceased was given in Nikah to Allgh Ditta cousin of the complainant. People started taunting me that for 10 years I had been supporting the family of the deceased, whereas Mst. Zainab was given in Nikah to Allah Ditta. On the day of occurrence Allah Ditta also taunted me that he had been married with Mst. Zainab, who was previously engaged with me. On this I became highly provoked at the spur of moment. In the meanwhile, I saw Mst. Zainab deceased on the Banna of the sugarcane field. I stabbed her under grave and sudden provocation. In the meantime, Mst. Haleeman deceased also emerged from the sugarcane crop. She held me from my testicles and started to squeeze them. I also inflicted injuries with dagger to Mst. Haliman in order to save my life. I did under Ghairat and in self-defence." He adduced no evidence in defence.

9. Muhammad Yaqoob (P.W.1) who is the complainant and brother of the two deceased deposed to the motive. He stated that the appellant wanted to marry Mst. Zainab alias Rani deceased but he did not agree and instead performed her Nikah with Allah Ditta, his cousin, on the day of occurrence at about 8-00 or 9-00 a.m: According to him, the appellant had a grouse on this account. In his cross-examination, he said that it -was two years prior to the occurrence that the father of the appellant had demanded the hand of Mst. Zainab for the appellant but he 'had turned down his request at that time. There was no suggestion in his cross-examination that his testimony as regards the motive was not t correct.

10. The ocular account of the occurrence was provided by Muhammad Yaqoob (P.W.1), who as mentioned above is the brother of the two deceased, Muhammad Ishaque (P.W.4), who is the Lambardar of the village, and Allah Ditta (P.W.5), near whose house the crime was perpetrated. All of them consistently deposed that on the day of occurrence the appellant armed with a dagger chased the two deceased and overtaking Mst. Zainab deceased caused her injuries with the dagger. Mst. Haleeman tried to rescue Mst. Zainab when she was also given dagger blows try the appellant. Both the deceased fell down and died at the spot as a result of the injuries. According to them, the entire occurrence had taken place in their presence and that of Jagdev P.W. who was given up as unnecessary. They further stated that they tried to apprehend the appellant but he threatening them with dire consequences ran towards his house and climbed up its roof. The villagers surrounded the house while Muhammad Yaqoob P.W. left for the police station to report the matter. The veracity-of the witnesses remained absolutely unshaken and their testimony proved beyond doubt that both the deceased died as a result of the injuries caused to them by the appellant with dagger P.1.

11. Sub-Inspector Nafees Ahmad Khan (P.W.10) deposed to the recovery of blood-stained dagger P.1. He said that when he reached the spot he found the appellant present on the top of the roof of his house with a blood-stained dagger in his hand. He got him down and covered from him blood-stained dagger P .1, vide memo Exh . P . E. , `' 1s: removed from his person blood-stained shirt P.2 and Chaddar P.3 and took them into possession vide memo Exh.P.F. Muhammad Ishaque (P.W.4), who is the Lambardar of the village, attested the recovery memoranda and supported the Sub-Inspector in his statement.

12. The learned counsel for the appellant has frankly conceded in his arguments that the appellant has been rightly convicted under section 302, P.P.C on two counts for the murder of the two deceased. He has, however, urged that the extreme penalty of death is not called for in this case. In this connection, he has referred to the statement of the appellant made under section 342, Cr.P.C. and reproduced above. The appellant has pleaded that Mst. Zainab alias Rani deceased was engaged to him, that he lived in the house of her family for nine or ten years and supported them, that subsequently when the Nikah of Mst. Zainab was performed with Allan Ditta, the people started taunting him that he had been supporting the family of Mst. Zainab for ten years but she had been given in Nikah to Allah Ditta, that on the day of occurrence Allah Ditta also taunted him similarly, that he got highly provoked and stabbed Mst. Zainab under grave and sudden provocation and that meanwhile Mst. Haleeman deceased appeared on the scene and started squeezing his testicles and he injured her in self-defence. None of the pleas, however, was suggested to any of the witnesses in cross-examination. Where is no iota of evidence on record to show that any of the pleas raised by the appellant was even plausible. Obviously the statement of the appellant was merely an afterthought and a contrivance. Since the appellant had acted in a very brutal and gruesome manner, the learned trial Judge was perfectly justified in imposing on him the death penalty on two counts.

13. In the result, we uphold the conviction and sentence of the appellant on two counts and dismiss the appeal. The sentence of death is confirmed. M . Y . H . Appeal dismissed.