1998 PLP 944 (MLD)

CH. EJAZ YOUSAF, J.

Aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment dated 30-4-1995, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Jhelum, Criminal Appeal bearing No. 106/1 of 1995 has been preferred by Daulat Ali appellant, father of the deceased Mst. Tahira, whereby he has challenged the acquittal of accused/respondents. Nos. l and 2 from the charges under sections 302, 109, 419 and 34 P.P.C. read with section 10(2) of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979, as well as the acquittal of accused/respondent No.3 from all the charges, whereas Criminal Revision No.20/1 of 1995 has been filed by him for the increase in the amount of compensation as well as enhancement of sentence awarded to respondents Nos. 1 and 2 by the trial Court under section 201/34, P.P.C. Another Criminal Appeal No. 129/1 of 1995 has been filed against the same judgment dated 30-4-1995 by appellants/respondents Muhammad Aslam and Muhammad Ashraf whereby they have been convicted under section 201/34, P.P.C. and sentenced to four years' rigorous imprisonment, and a fine of Rs.10,000 or in default thereof to further undergo three months S.I. The amount of fine to the extent of one-half was directed to be paid to the legal heirs of the deceased under section 544-A, Cr.P.C. We propose to decide these appeals as well as, the revision by this single judgment.

2. Briefly stated, the prosecution case as reflected from the contents of report No. 11 dated 23-3-1993 Exh. P.H. as well as F.I.R. bearing No.76 dated 30-4-1993 is that Muhammad Aslam appellant who is resident of Nai Abadi village Pakhwal, Police Station Saddar Jhelum, appeared before the police on 23-4-1993 and made his statement wherein he deposed that he was a cultivator by profession and he alongwith his brother Muhammad Ashraf was residing in a haveli situated in the said village. It was disclosed in the report that on 23-4-1993 while he was away to village Kala Gujran for his personal work and his brother Muhammad Ashraf had gone to Tandlianwala for purchasing household articles and his wife Mst. Irshad Bibi and nephew Muhammad Mahmood were busy in cutting the wheat crop in the fields outside the village his daughter Mst. Riffat Jabeen, who was all alone in the house committed suicide by burning herself. He further stated that at about 10 a.m. while coming back to village Kala Gujran, it was noticed by him that people had gathered outside his house. On reaching the spot, he saw, that her daughter's dead body was lying in a room of his house, situated on the western side. It was further disclosed in the report that his brother Muhammad Ashraf, wife Mst. Irshad Begum, brother's wife Mst. Maqbool Begum and his nephew Muhammad Mahmood who happened to be the husband of Mst. Riffat were present at the spot. They told the complainant that Mst. Riffat Jabeen having closed the door of the house has set herself on fire and committed suicide. It was further disclosed in the report by the informer i.e. said Muhammad Aslam that neither he has enmity with any body nor he had any doubt with regard to the incident. His statement was recorded in the aforementioned report No. 11 which was duly signed by him. Record reveals that since in the aforementioned report it was alleged by the accused/respondent Muhammad Aslam that his daughter Mst. Riffat Jabeen had committed suicide and that he had no doubt in that behalf and there was no report of any cognizable offence, therefore, the police after preparing the injury statement sent the dead body to the District Headquarters Hospital for post-mortem examination. Record of the case further reveals that after post-mortem examination the dead body was brought back by the male accused persons and after offering funeral prayers in the courtyard of their haveli buried the same in their family graveyard. It also appears from the record that though in consequence of above report proceedings under section 174, Cr.P.C. were initiated by the police yet no serious effort towards discovery of truth was made upto 9-4-1993 when investigation of the case was handed over to P.W.22 Mubarak Ali, A.S.I. It further appears from record that P.W.22 after receiving the post-mortem report of the deceased sought further explanation from the concerned Medical Officer who had conducted the post-mortem through Exh. P.B. The view expressed by the said Medical Officer was that the injuries found on the dead body were caused by some other person and probably with sharp-edged weapon. In order to ascertain nature and location of the injuries it would be advantageous to reproduce hereinbelow the post-mortem report in extenso:-- Name: Riffat Bibi Husband's name Muhammad Mahmood Caste Jat Residence Nai Abadi Pakhwal Sex Female Age Approx: 24/25 years Body brought by Muhammad Razzaq Body identified by Muhammad Ashraf son of Muhammad Aslam Muhammad Aslam son Muhammad Alam, Nai Abadi Pakhwal. Whence brought Nai Abadi Pakhwal, village, thana, Tehsil and District District Jhelum, P.S. Saddar Jhelum. Death Not exactly known Examination of body 23-4-1993 at 5.00 p.m. Despatch of matter: Tissues of body sent for to Chemical Examiner: Histop Vaginal swabs sent for Chemical Examiner. Symptoms observed: Nil before death Information furnished: Death caused by by police. burning.

1. EXTERNAL APPEARANCE A dead body of a young female, very foul smelling and approximately 100% brunt wearing only Qameez (Red silky having pattron on it) which also burnt and sticking to the skin. She was stied up at the back with a brown coloured Parna right wrist and left elbow. Her features were not identifiable. Her face was balloted due to swelling of all the features of the face. Her skin at the limbs was seen cracked deeply burnt. Rigor mortis was present. Following other injuries were found on the body. (1) A spindel shaped wound 10 cm x 3 cm bone deep was found on the right parital area of the skull. The underlying bone was also found fractured which was linear in nature. Maggots were present in this wound. (2) An extensive L shaped wound extending from right side of the chest and abdomen and reaching left side of the body across the abdomen. Many loops of the intestines were found lying outside the body (3) A horizontal wound across left breast exposing the decaying tissue of the breast. After performing the external and internal post-mortem of the deceased and in the light of reports from Bacteriologist and Chemical Examiner (Report No.909/BACT-ML dated 24-5-1993 and Report No.919/S 473/SA dated 30-4-1993 respectively). I am of the opinion that:-- (1) The burning of the body was approximate 100 % and was anti-mortem in nature. (2) Injuries No. 1, 2, and 3 are anti-mortem in nature and inflicted by some sharp-edged weapon. (3) Sexual intercourse was performed by some male person on her. In my opinion the cause of death in this case was due to burning, injury No. 1 and injury No.2 individually and collectively, causing the compound fracture of skull, rupture of peritonium leading to profuse bleeding, resulting into hypovolemic and neurgoenic shock which are sufficient to cause death in ordinary course of nature. The probable time between injuries and death = immediate (within one hour) and the probable time between death and post-mortem = (approximate) one to two days. The final opinion about the cause of death and nature of injuries would be given after the receipt of reports from bacteriologist and Chemical Examiner, Lahore. For final opinion please consult back page." (Dr. Ijaz Ahmad Sh.) C. M. O. It also appears from the record, that by that time, Report of the Chemical Examiner regarding vaginal swabs taken out at the time of post mortem was also received wherein, it was mentioned that the deceased before her death was-also subjected to Zina-bil-Jabr. It further appears from the record that after going through the Chemical Examiner's Report the Investigating Officer became suspicious. He as such contacted appellant Daulat Ali and his wife Mst. Fazal Noor whose daughter namely, Mst. Tahira, aged about 13/14 years was reportedly missing since 20-4-1993. She was allegedly left with accused respondent No. 3 Mst. Riffat on 20-4-1993 in accused respondents house, whereafter she was not traceable. Record further reveals that P.W.22 as such immediately rushed to the place of occurrence and carried out a detailed inspection. It was noticed by him, that a portion of the floor of the room wherein the deceased had reportedly committed suicide, appeared to have been dug previously and subsequently tried to be levelled because some newly dug earth was visible. On suspicion, he removed the earth, in consequence whereof a small pitch was traced wherefrom, a pillow cover, duly filled with blood-stained earth was recovered. In addition thereto, one blood-stained dopatta, pieces of broken bangles, a piece of Shalwar and a pair of slightly burnt chappal were also recovered from the said room. Some blood stains were also found on a nearby wall. The P.W.22 as such, called the photographer and preserved location of the spot through photograph Exh.P.5/1-6. Sample from the blood-stained earth was also taken out and the parcel was prepared at the spot. All the recovered items were duly identified, to be that of Mst. Tahira by her father and mother. It also appears from the record that since in the circumstances there was strong possibility that the dead body might have been burnt in order to escape the liability of murder and also to destroy the evidence, therefore, report Exh. P.H./1 was immediately prepared and sent to Police Station. Saddar, Jhelum for registration of the case. Consequently, F.I.R. bearing No.76 dated 30-4-1993 was lodged against the accused under sections 302, 201, 109 and 419/34, P.P.C. read with section 10(3) of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979. During the course of investigation grave of the deceased was also exhumated and the dead body was duly identified to be that of Mst. Tahira by P.W. Daulat Ali, P.W. Mst. Fazal Noor, and P.W. Mst Nasreen, father, mother and real sister of the deceased respectively. After completion of the investigation accused were challaned to Court for trial.

3. At trial, the prosecution examined 22 witnesses. P. W.1 Talib Hussain, deposed that on 26-5-1993 he was posted as Foot Constable at Police Post Kala Gujran, Police Station Saddar, Jhelum. On the same day, Moharrir of the Police Post handed over to him, four sealed parcels said to contain blood-stained earth, blood-stained cotton, blood-stained hatchet and blood-stained chhurri for onward transmission to the office of Chemical Examiner, Lahore, which were delivered intact on 27-5-1993 for examination and procured result thereof from the said office on 29-5-1993 P.W. Ameer Afsar deposed that on 23-4-1993 while he was posted as Muharrir Head Constable, Police Station Saddar Jhelum, he received two envelopes, one parcel and clothes, one parna and a sealed phial containing swabs which he kept in the Malkhana and subsequently delivered the same to Constable Asghar Ali for onward transmission to the office of Chemical Examiner, Lahore, intact. The said Constable came back with the result on 29-4-1993. He further stated that the formal F.I.R. Exh. P.A. was registered by him on 30-4-1993 on receipt of complaint sent by Mubarak Ahmad, S.I. P.W.3 Muhammad Razzak, Constable No.610 affirmed on oath that on 23-4-1993 he escorted the dead body of the deceased to the District Headquarters Hospital, Jhelum and got the post-mortem examination conducted. The Medical Officer, after conducting the post-mortem-examination, handed over to him two sealed parcels, two sealed envelopes, one burnt karneez (piece) and a parna, which he handed over to Muharrir Head Constable, Amir Afsar, intact. Asghar Ali, Constable No. 872 was examined as P.W.4. He deposed that on 26-4-1993 the Moharrir of Police Station Saddar Jhelum, handed over to him two sealed parcels and two sealed envelopes for onward transmission to the office of the Chemical Examiner, Lahore. He further deposed that he deposited the same in the concerned office on 27-4-1993 and collected result thereof on 29-4-1993 and handed over the same to the Moharrir. P.W.5 Muhammad Ashraf deposed that on 30-4-1993 Sub-Inspector Mubarak Ahmad, handed over to him, blood stained earth, blood-stained cotton, blood-stained chhurri and blood-stained hatchet, which he kept in the Malkhana, intact. The same were subsequently, handed over to Talib Hussain, who obtained the docket and again deposited with him the said parcels. On 27-5-1993, the parcels, were again handed over to the said Constable, for onward transmission to the office of Chemical Examiner, Lahore, intact. The Constable came back with the respective results and handed over the same on 29-5-1993. P.W.6 Maulvi Farid Hussain, Paish Imam of the mosque, situated in village Pakhwal deposed, that on 23-4-1993 he was present in his house. He heard the noise that Mst. Rifat Bibi, daughter of Muhammad Aslam had committed suicide by burning herself to death. He led the Jinaza prayer of Mst. Rifat Bibi deceased, in the courtyard of Muhammad Aslam accused. He further deposed, that dead body was buried in a nearby courtyard belonging to the accused. P.W.7 Sikandar Hayat deposed that on the day of incident he was present in his shop. He saw, that family members of Mst. Rifat were weeping and bewailing. On inquiry, he was told, that Mst. Rifat had committed suicide by burning herself. He further deposed, that police came at the spot and prepared the inquest report Exh. P.A. which was signed by him. Maqbool Hussain, draftsman was examined as P.W.8. He prepared the site plans Exh. P.B. and Exh. P.B./1, which were subsequently produced in Court. P.W.9 Tariq Mahmood is a witness of recoveries. He affirmed on oath that in his presence Ashraf accused volunteered to lead the police to the place of recovery and got recovered hatchet Exh. P.3 which was blood-stained. He further deposed that memo of recovery was also prepared at the spot, which was signed by him alongwith Muhammad Akram P.W. He further deposed that Aslam accused also led the police party to the place of recovery, in his presence and got recovered blood-stained chhurri Exh. P.4 which too, was duly sealed in a parcel vide memo. Exh. P.E. which was also attested by him alongwith said Akram P.W. P.W.10 Qadeer Ahmad, photographer deposed that on 30-4-1994 he took photographs of a room wherein one wooden almirah was lying. He produced photographs alongwith negatives in Court, which were taken into possession by the police vide Exh. P.F., which was attested by him. P.W.11 Abdur Rauf, A.S.I. deposed that he investigated the matter M.P.W. report lodged by Muhammad Aslam. He said that on 23-4-1993, Muhammad Aslam accused appeared before him and made statement Exh. P.G., which was reduced into writing and read over to the accused, whereafter it was signed by him. He identified signatures of the accused Exh. P.G./1. He further deposed that thereafter, he proceeded to the place of the occurrence, where he prepared the inquest report Exh. P.G. The inquest report was duly singed by Muhammad Arshad and Sikandar Hayat. He affirmed that the dead body was lying in the house of Muhammad Aslam, wherefrom it was sent for post-mortem examination. Aslam and Ashraf accused were sent alongwith dead body, for identification before the doctor. He affirmed that after post-mortem examination, Muhammad Razzaq Constable produced before him a copy of post-mortem report, other papers, sealed parcel, sealed envelope, sealed phial containing swabs and another sealed envelope, shirt of deceased Exh. P.1 and a Patna Exh. P.2 which he took into possession vide Exh. P.L. He stated that initially he carried out investigation of the case under section 174, Cr.P.C., but subsequently handed over the same to Mubarak Ahmad S.I. for further necessary action. P.W.12 Mumtaz Ali deposed that on 20-5-1993, in his presence, the grave of Mst. Tahira situated near the house of male accused persons was exhumated. The dead body was identifiable, which was identified by him as Mst. Tahira Bibi daughter of Daulat Ali. Sabir Hussain was examined as P. W.13. He deposed that he was Chairman of Union Council Bokan. About a year back Muhammad Aslam accused, who was previously known to him, came to his house alongwith his daughter Mst. Rifat. Muhammad Aslam stated that he, after committing rape with Mst. Tahira, had murdered her with the help of Muhammad Ashraf and his daughter Mst. Rifat. He further stated that it was also disclosed by Aslam that thereafter, they had set the body on fire. He further deposed that it was also disclosed to him by Aslam that after being hands of Mst. Tahira Bibi with a parna, he had inflicted a chhurri blow, whereas, his brother gave hatchet blow to her. He further narrated that thereafter, they spread out this rumour that their daughter Mst. Rifat had committed suicide and lodged the report with the police, as such. Muhammad Khan was examined as P.W.14. He is also a witness of extra-judicial confession. He deposed that about a year back, Muhammad Ashraf accused who was previously known to him, came to his house and disclosed that his brother Muhammad Aslam had committed rape with Mst. Tahira. The witness further deposed that it was also disclosed by Muhammad Ashraf that his brother Muhammad Aslam accused and Mst. Rifat Bibi after commission of rape, tied the hands of Mst. Tahira with the help of Mst. Rifat's Parna at her back whereof Aslam inflicted churri blow whereas, he (Muhammad Ashraf) inflicted hatchet blow to Mst. Tahira. Subsequently, as per his disclosure, the dead body was set on fire. The witness further deposed that he was told by Muhammad Ashraf that after killing Mst. Tahira they spread the general news that Mst. Rifat daughter of Muhammad Aslam, had committed suicide and her dead body was buried as such. The witness further affirmed on oath that he produced Muhammad Ashraf accused before the police. Mst. Nasreen, sister of deceased Mst. Tahira was examined as P.W.15. She deposed that after the exhumation dead body of Mst. Tahira was identified by her. He further deposed that during investigation of the case she visited the Police Station wherein she also identified a burnt piece of the shirt of her sister Mst. Tahira Bibi Exh. P.1 and parna belonging to Mst. Rifat accused Exh. P./2. She disclosed that she had identified the shirt because a pillow cover of the same cloth was also stitched alongwith the shirt. P.W.16 Mst. Fazal Noor, mother of Mst. Tahira deceased deposed on oath that on 20-4-1993 her husband went to Mirpur. On the same day at about digerwela, she alongwith her deceased daughter, left home to cut fodder. When they were passing by the courtyard of Muhammad Aslam accused, Mst. Rifat accused was seen sitting therein whereas, Muhammad Aslam accused was lying on a cot at the relevant time, in the said house. She deposed that on the request of Mst. Rifat they sat with her for a while. After sometime when she was about to proceed to the fields, Mst. Rifat requested her to leave Mst. Tahira with her and said that she (Mst. Tahira) would follow her in a short while. She deposed that she as such, left her daughter Mst. Tahira with Mst. Rifat and proceeded to the fields. Muhammad Ashraf accused met her on the way to the fields. She further deposed that after cutting fodder when she came back she saw Mst. Rifat throwing garbage. On inquiry she disclosed that her daughter Mst. Tahira had already gone home. The witness further deposed that on reaching her house she saw that her house was locked as before, and her daughter was missing. She as such searched for her. The witness deposed that she had inquired from Mst. Rifat accused again but her reply was the same. Mst. Fazal Noor further deposed that she as such, searched for her daughter, but could not find her whereabouts. On the next day when her husband came back she narrated him the incident. He also searched for Mst. Tahira, but they could not find her. They also went again to the accused persons at their residence, but they showed their ignorance about the whereabouts of Mst. Tahira. She further deposed that on the third day they also went to the house of accused, but their reply was the same. On the fourth day at about 10.00 a.m. they heard that the house of Muhammad Aslam had caught fire. They, as such, immediately rushed to the said house where they were told by Aslam and Ashraf accused that their daughter Mst. Rifat had committed suicide by burning herself because the witness (Mst. Fazal Noor and Daulat Ali) were blaming her for the disappearance of Mst. Tahira. The witness further deposed that they were thereafter, insulted by both the accused and were asked to leave the house immediately. They were not permitted to enter into the house or see the dead body. She deposed that thereafter, it was learnt that the dead body was buried by the accused persons in their family courtyard. The witness further deposed that they set out again in search of their daughter Mst. Tahira. After 6/7 days they came to know that Mst. Rifat accused was alive whereas Muhammad Aslam and Muhammad Ashraf were absconding. They as such reported the matter to the police. The witness further deposed that police visited the place of occurrence in their presence and collected a burnt piece of Shalwar Exh. P.7, Chappal, Exh. P.8/1-2 which was thumb marked by her. Police also recovered various pieces of bangles vide recovery memo. Exh. P.M. She deposed that she identified the pieces of said bangles belonging to Mst. Tahira deceased. She further deposed that police in her presence also took into possession blood stained earth and a pillow cover vide recovery memo. Exh. P.O. and other articles beside preserving taking samples from the blood-stains available on the all with the help of a cotton, in her presence. She further deposed that thereafter, she also joined the exhumation proceedings and identified the dead body of her daughter Mst. Tahira. She also identified a piece of shirt Exh. P. 1 of Mst. Tahira deceased and a Parna Exh. P.2 belonging to the accused Mst. Rifat. P.W.17 Daulat Ali, father of Mst. Tahira affirmed on oath almost all the facts narrated by P.W.16 and corroborated the statement of Mst. Fazal Noor in all the Material particulars Muhammad Iqbal was examined as P.W.18. He deposed that on 23-4-1993 he saw that the house of accused caught fire. He alongwith other accused persons extinguished the fire. On the same day he joined Janaza prayer Mst. Rifat and attended the funeral. He further deposed that on 30-5-1993 he wined the exhumation proceedings and pointed out the grave of Mst. Rifat Bibi. The dead body was identified in his presence by Daulat ali and others to be that of Mst. Tahira. Syed Saghir Hussain Shah was examined as P.W.19. He deposed that on 20-5-1993 in his presence exhumation proceedings were carried out. The dead body of Mst. Tahira in his presence was exhumed. P.W.20 Dr. Ejaz Ahmad Shaikh, Medical Officer deposed that on 23-4-1993 he was posted as Medical Officer in District Headquarters Hospital Jhelum. On the same day (lead body of Mst. Rifat was brought before him which was identified by Muhammad Ashraf and Muhammad Aslam accused. He deposed that the dead body of a young female was Brought to him, which was approximately 100 % burnt. Her Kamis was sticking to the skin. She was found tied up at the back with a brown coloured Parna. He deposed that he found certain injuries on the dead body, which were duly incorporated in the Medical Certificate. He further deposed that he deferred his final opinion regarding the cause of death till the Report of Bacteriologist and Chemical Examiner. He further deposed that after performing the external and internal post-mortem of the deceased and in the light of the reports of the bacteriologist as well as the Chemical Examiner, he was of the opinion that injuries Nos. l, 2 and 3 were anti-mortem in nature and inflicted by some sharp-edged weapon and that the sexual intercourse was performed with her by some male person. In his opinion the cause of death was due to burning, injury No. 1 and injury No. 2 individually and collectively, causing the compound fracture of skull and rupture of peritonium which caused profuse bleeding etc. He further deposed that probable time between injuries and death was immediate (within one hour) and the probable time between death and post mortem was approximately one to two days. He affirmed that Exh. P.S. was the correct carbon copy of post-mortem report. He further deposed that after post mortem examination he handed over the dead body, post-mortem report, last worn clothes, one sealed parcel and envelope for Bacteriologist, Lahore and one scaled bottle/phial and sealed envelope for Chemical Examiner, Lahore to Muhammad Razzaq Constable. Syed Shabbir Akhtar, Medical Officer, Rural licalth Centre, Dina, was examined as P.W.21. He stated that on 20-5-1993 he was present at the time of exhumation and the grave was also pointed out by Muhammad Iqbal in his presence. Mubarak Ahmad S.I. was examined as P.W.22. He deposed that on 29-4-1993 he was posted at Police Station Saddat as Incharge of Police Post Kala Gujran. He took over investigation of the case from Abdur Rauf, A.S.I. Keeping in view the post-mortem report of the deceased he through application Exh. P.V. sought further explanation from the Medical Officer who expressed his opinion that injuries found on the person of the dead body were caused by some other persons with the help of sharp-edged weapons. He further deposed that he as such on 30-4-1993 alongwith Daulat Ali, Fazal Noor and Ch. Zareef P.Ws. inspected the place of occurrence as a result whereof a ditch was found, wherefrom a pillow cover duly filled with blood-stained earth was recovered. In addition thereto a burnt wooden Almirah and pieces of broken bangles were also recovered. The said pieces of bangles were identified by Fazal Noor and Daulat Ali to be that of Mst. Tahira. The witness further deposed that during the site inspection blood was also found on the western wall of the room which was secured through cotton. He called the photographer and also preserved the spot. He further disclosed that site inspection also transpired that Mst. Tahira was subjected to zina and was, thereafter, murdered and her dead body was burnt not only to escape the liability of her murder but also to destroy the evidence. He deposed that he prepared report Exh. P.H./1 and sent the same to the police station for formal registration of the case. He stated that he recorded the statements of P. Ws. and effected the other recoveries in presence of the witnesses, in accordance with the law. He further deposed that he also got conducted exhumation proceedings in the course whereof the dead body was duly identified by Daulat Ali, Mst. Fazal Noor, Mst. Nasreen to be that of Mst. Tahira. He also prepared the identification memo. Exh. P.Y. and site plan Exh. P.Z. He deposed that he challaned the accused after completion of the investigation.

4. District Attorney vide his statement dated 20-2-1995 gave up the remaining P.Ws. i.e. Muhammad Arshad, having been won over and Muhammad Zareef, Muhammad Akram and Muhammad Gulzar being unnecessary. He, however, tendered in evidence, the Report of Chemical Examiner Exh. P.A. and that of Bacteriologist Exh. P.E. before closing the prosecution evidence.

5. The accused persons/respondents were thereafter examined under section 342, Cr.P.C. In their statements all the accused denied the charges and pleaded that the deceased had in fact committed suicide. The male accused, however, stated that they were under this bona fide impression that in fact Mst. Rifat had committed suicide. Mst. Rifat, on the other hand, while denying the allegations in answer to question 11 stated as under:-- "I was married to Mahmood Ahmed son of my uncle Muhammad Ashraf, my co-accused for about 5 years I am issueless and for that reason I have very strange relations with my husband and he used to give me beating. I was complaining about my husband to my parents but they always took side of my husband and forced me to be with my husband at any cost. On 23-4-1993 at morning time when my husband gave me abuses and had given me beating I came to the house of my parents which is in the same haveli and adjacent to the house of my in- laws. I told my parents that I will not go to my husband's house as he is not properly treated me rather I will prefer to suicide. After my conversation with my parents when all the family members of my house were busy in the fields to cut crops, I came to know through a family child that my husband is searching for me in an angry mood and thereafter without informing anybody went to the house of my relative Manzoor Hussain in village Mohra Tehsil Mirpur. In the night between 23-4-1993 and 24-4-1993 a messenger came to Mirpur to inform Manzoor Hussain about my suicidal death. I then immediately alongwith Manzoor Hussain came to my house on the following morning and alongwith my father-in-law Muhammad Ashraf went to police station where my father was under arrest on the suspicion of my murder, when we informed the police about real state of affair, police arrested me and my father-in-law also there and then. The allegation in the question is incorrect. " All the accused persons, as such, pleaded their innocence. Accused Muhammad Aslam, however, stated that neither he would produce evidence in his defence nor would make a statement in terms of section 340(2), Cr.P.C. whereas accused Muhammad Ashraf and Mst. Rifat though initially showed their willingness to produce evidence yet subsequently, they not only failed to lead their defence, but declined to appear as their own witnesses to make statements under section 340(2), Cr.P.C. as well. No evidence in defence, as such, was produced.

6. After hearing arguments of the parties, the learned trial Court acquitted accused Mst. Rifat Bibi of the charge. However, he convicted and sentenced the remaining two accused as mentioned in the opening para. hereof.

7. We have heard Mr. Malik Rab Nawaz Noon, Advocate, learned counsel for the appellant in Criminal Appeal No. 106/1 of 1995 as well as Mr. Raja Abdul Qayyum, Advocate, learned counsel for the appellants/respondents in Criminal Appeal No. 129/1 of 1995 and Mr. Muhammad Aslam Uns, Advocate, for the State.

7. Mr. Malik Rab Nawaz Noon, Advocate, learned counsel for the appellant has raised mainly, the following contentions:-- (a) That the medical evidence available on record was not appreciated properly. Sufficient material was available on record to show, that the deceased was in fact murdered, therefore, the trial Court was under legal obligation to form its independent opinion, after going through the same and decide the case accordingly. (b) that the learned trial Court also failed to take into consideration the evidence regarding commission of Zina with deceased which rendered sufficient corroboration to the extra-judicial confessions. (c) That the extra-judicial confessions made before P. W.13 Sabir Hussain and P. W.14 Muhammad Khan by the accused Muhammad Aslam and Muhammad Ashraf respectively, were also wrongly rejected and disbelieved by the learned trial Court despite the fact that both the witnesses were independent and respectables of the locality and that no enmity or motive for false implication was alleged against them. (d) That the recovery evidence relating to the blood-stained weapons alleged to have been recovered from the accused/respondents Nos. 1 and 2 was also wrongly rejected by the trial Court without cogent reasons particularly, when the recovery witnesses were impartial, independent and residents of the locality. (e) That the last seen evidence of the deceased in the company of Mst. Rifat as well as Muhammad Aslam too, was wrongly rejected by the trial Court despite the fact that the dead body of the deceased was later on recovered from their house and was also buried by them in their family graveyard on the pretext that it was the dead body of their daughter Mst. Riffat. (f) That the learned trial Court did not give proper consideration to the conduct of accused/respondents Nos. l to 3 before and after the commission of crime despite the fact that the same was relevant for the purpose of deciding their guilt or innocence. (g) That the trial Court did not critically analyse the prosecution evidence. The impugned judgment of the trial Court suffers from misreading and non-reading of material evidence inasmuch as, the learned trial Court after reproducing the examination-in-chief of the witnesses only, jumped to the conclusion that the prosecution has failed to prove the charge. (h) That it was the case of abundant circumstantial evidence and all the incriminating links in the commission of offence were properly proved. The chain of circumstances was strongly connected with each other, therefore, the trial Court ought to have recorded conviction of the accused for the offence of murder.

8. Mr. Raja Abdul Qayyum,- Advocate, learned counsel for the appellants/accused/respondents (Muhammad Aslam and Muhammad Ashraf) while controverting the above contentions has urged:-- (i) That the alleged extra-judicial confessions made before P. W.22 could not be proved against accused persons under Articles 38, 39 and 40 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat Order. (ii) It has been alleged by the prosecution that accused Muhammad Aslam had confessed his guilt before P.W.13 in the presence of his daughter Mst. Rifat which appears to be unnatural. (iii) That the prosecution has failed to prove that the house in which, the incident had allegedly taken place and wherefrom recovery was subsequently effected belonged to the accused persons. In absence of the proof of the ownership, the accused could not be saddled with the liability of murder. (iv) That the alleged recoveries of hatchet and chhurri from the house of the accused were effected with a delay of 24 days, which appear to have been implanted, as the accused have had sufficient time to destroy the evidence. (v) That the injuries mentioned in the post-mortem report by the doctor appear to have been caused by the burning generated by extensive heat. (vi) That the other recoveries have also been foisted/implanted against the accused. (vii) That the alleged extra-judicial confessions made by the male accused persons too, were delayed. Even otherwise, the same are weakest type of evidence, therefore, no reliance could be legally placed thereon. (viii) That there was a considerable delay in lodging the F.I.R. The incident had allegedly taken place on or about 20-4-1993, whereas the F.I.R. was lodged on 30-4-1993. Since the delay remained unexplained at the trial, therefore, possibility of concoction cannot be ruled out.

9. We have given our anxious consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the record with their help.

10. In support of his first contention i.e. regarding evaluation of the medical evidence, learned counsel for the appellant (Daulat Ali) submitted that the trial Court did not appreciate the medical evidence properly particularly with regard to the allegation of murder of the deceased, therefore, findings in this behalf are not sustainable. In order to find out as to whether there is any substance in this argument we have ourselves, carefully gone through the relevant record. Admittedly, it is nobody's case that the deceased had not met with unnatural death. Dispute, primarily relates to the manner and cause of death. Appellant says deceased was murdered. Respondents' contention is that it was a case of suicide, therefore, precise question for consideration would be that as to whether, the deceased was murdered or she had committed suicide. A bare perusal of post-mortem report Exh. P.B. as well as the statement of P.W.20 Dr. Ejaz Ahmad Shaikh, would reveal that following injuries were present on the body of the deceased when she was brought to the Hospital by the male respondents for the purpose of port-mortem:-- "(1) A spindle shape wound measuring 10 c.m. x 3 c.m. bone deep was found on the right parital area of the skull. The underlying bone was also found fractured which was linear in nature. Maggots were present in this wound. (2) An extensive L shaped wound extending from right side of the chest and abdomen and reaching left side of the body across the abdomen. Many loops of the intestines were found lying outside the body. (3) A horizontal wound across left breast exposing the decaying issue of the breast. " On opening the scalp, it was also noticed by the doctor that the right parital bone was also fractured. Learned counsel for the accused/respondents while confronted with the above evidence stated that these injuries might have been the result of burning. In order to substantiate his version he referred to the statement of doctor and stated that during the course of cross-examination the doctor had admitted that:-- "Severe heat can cause cracks and fissures resembling incised wound in the burnt body." Therefore, possibility of the same having been caused by burning cannot be ruled out. No doubt, the doctor has expressed such opinion, but as per our estimation, this has not happened in the instant case because P.W.20 Dr. Ejaz Ahmad Shaikh has also expressed this definite opinion that these injuries were anti-mortem in nature and inflicted by sharp-edged weapons and this opinion, as pet doctor himself, was formed by him in the light of the reports given by Bacteriologist as well as Chemical Examiner i.e. Report No. 909/BSCT-ML dated 24-9-1993 (Exh. P.D.) and Report No. 919/S.A., dated 30-7-1993 (Exh. P.U.), respectively. Obviously, if the injuries would have been the result of burning, then it would not have been opined by the doctor that injuries were "anti-mortem" rather it would have been mentioned that the same were "post- mortem". Further, it has also come on record, through the statement of doctor that injuries Nos. 1 and 2 individually and collectively were sufficient to cause death of the deceased, therefore, to our mind, it appears to be highly improbable to burn oneself after sustaining such grievous injuries particularly, when the same were extensive in nature and there was no possibility of having been self- inflicted. In forming this view, we are fortified by this fact as well, that the doctor has affirmed on oath that the deceased was found tied at the back with a brown colour Patna at right wrist and right elbow. Here it may be pointed out that such observations were made by the doctor when he was examining the dead body proposed to him to be of Riffat as a "Suicidal case" and this portion of his statement was not challenged at the trial, Learned counsel for the respondents in this behalf attempted to argue that since only one arm of the deceased was found tied, therefore, possibility of committing suicide by her with the untied arm cannot be ruled out. This argument does not appear to he genuine to us particularly with facts and circumstances of the present case. It is explicit from record that the deceased was a girl of 13/14 years of age and was of ordinary built and that she, prior to her death was badly injured. It is also evident from the record, that a large wooden almirah was found lying on her body in a semi burnt condition which as per our estimation, was used as fuel for the purpose of burning the dead body, therefore, by no stretch of imagination it could be presumed that the deceased being so severely injured and having been tied by one arm, at the back, was still in a position to pull upon herself the huge almirah and burnt herself to death. Sign regarding use of, any other kinds of fuel, in the incident, were untraced. Further, we are unable to understand, as to how it was possible for the deceased, to lit the fire by one hand only, having been buried and quelled under such a huge large almirah. In such view of the matter, the argument advanced by the learned counsel for the respondents appears to be without any substance.

11. Adverting to the next submission of Mr. Malik Rab Nawaz Noon, learned counsel for the appellant that medical evidence regarding commission of Zina-bil-Jabr with the deceased was also wrongly ignored by the learned trial Court. It may be observed that the learned counsel for the appellant has perhaps raised this objection under a misconception. No doubt the learned trial Court has declined to convict the accused Muhammad Aslam under the charge of zina-bil jabr due to this reason that the circumstantial evidence produced by the prosecution in the instant case was not, according to him, sufficient to connect the accused with the commission of the offence of rape, yet it has been specifically observed by the learned trial Court that the medical evidence furnished by Dr. Ejaz Ahmad Shaikh P.W.20, whereby he had mentioned in Para No-3 of his statement that sexual intercourse was performed by some male person on her was in the opinion of the trial Court "confirmatory, explanatory and corroboratory in nature", however, it was observed by the learned trial Court that since the circumstantial evidence produced by the prosecution in the instant case was not sufficient to prove the charge regarding commission of Zina-bil-Jabr against Muhammad Aslam accused, therefore, he was not liable to be punished. Thus, the evidence regarding commission of zina with the deceased as per our estimation, was not disbelieved by the learned trial Court. However, it is altogether a different matter that the learned trial Court declined to convict the accused on the charge of zina, for the aforementioned reason, because the extra judicial confessions were also disbelieved by the trial Court. There appears to be no force in this contention of the learned counsel for the appellant, as put forth by him.

12. In order to supplement his third contention that the extra-judicial confessions made by male accused/respondents before RW.13 and P.W.14 were wrongly rejected by the learned trial Court. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant vehemently contended that both, the aforementioned witnesses were independent and respectables of the locality. They had neither any motive for falsely implicating the accused-respondents nor any enmity was alleged against them Further, both the statements were not only proved to be true and voluntary at the trial but were duly corroborated by the medical evidence, recovery of crime weapon, other incriminating articles, last seen evidence and the fact that the deceased before her death was subjected to zina. Learned counsel for the appellant further added that in addition to the above other circumstantial evidence was also available on record which was sufficient to prove the charge of murder against the accused persons. Learned counsel for the accused/respondents, on the other hand, controverted the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant and stated, that the extra-judicial confession allegedly made by the accused/respondents, before P.W.22, the Investigating Officer, were not admissible under Articles 38, 39 and 40 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat Order, therefore, same were rightly disbelieved by the learned trial Court. He further argued that even otherwise it was alleged by the prosecution that Muhammad Aslam accused had confessed his guilt before; P.W.13 in the presence of her daughter Mst. Riffat Bibi which appears to be not only unnatural, but fake as well. In order to ascertain genuinity of the aforementioned extra-judicial confessions, particularly with regard to the respective contentions of the parties, we have, carefully gone through the evidence on record, besides perusing relevant portions of the impugned judgment. It appears that in discarding the extra judicial confessions following reasons have been advanced by the trial Court in the impugned judgment:-- (i) That the confession made by Muhammad Aslam accused before P.W.13 in the presence of his daughter, particularly, with regard to the commission of the offence of Zina, was anomalous. (ii) That since it was stated by P. W.13 in his statement that he knew about the incident 7. to 10 days prior to the day when accused Muhammad Aslam had allegedly confessed his guilt before him, therefore, possibility of concoction was apparent. (iii) It was admitted by P. W.13 in his statement, that before 10-5-1993 he was not associated with the investigation, therefore, it was not possible for him, to have knowledge of the incident. It appears that since his statement to this extent was apparently contradictory his version mentioned earlier in para. ii above, therefore, his statement was not believed. (iv) Since accused Muhammad Aslam had given his extra-judicial confession in the presence of Investigating Officer i.e. P.W.22, therefore, the same was not admissible. (v) That the Investigating Officer had no occasion to visit the house of Sabir. (vi) As per P.W.14 accused Muhammad Ashraf before making the extra -judicial confession had stayed for about three days in his (Muhammad Khan's house) house which was highly improbable. (vii) That the extra-judicial confession was weakest type of evidence, unless corroborated by, other independent incriminating evidence. In order to determine validity and soundness of these "reasons" we would like to take the same one by one. First objection with regard to the extra -judicial confession of accused Aslam having been made by him in the presence of his daughter is belied by the record. During the course of her cross- examination it was categorically stated by P.W.13 that "when accused Aslam disclosed to me about the incident Mst. Rifat was not present and was sitting in a separate room", therefore, obviously the objection has no substance. So far as, the second objection, with regard to the knowledge of incident by P.W.13, seven to ten days prior to the day when Aslam accused confessed his guilt before him is concerned, there appears nothing unnatural in it, rather the same was natural. It seems that the statement of P.W.13 has not been appreciated by the trial Court in pith and substance. P. W. 13 had deposed asunder:-- "I know about the occurrence even prior to 10-5-1993. I know about the murder of Tahira Bibi 7 to 10 days prior to 10-5-1993." It appears that the learned trial Court has wrongly equated the knowledge of "occurrence" or "murder" of the deceased with the knowledge of "murder by the accused". It is a matter of record that it was for the first time on 30-4-1993 that people came to know that the dead body taken out from the house of accused persons, was not of Mst. Rifat but of Mst. Tahira when as a result of investigation made by P.W.22 F.I.R. was got lodged by him and Mst. Rifat was seen alive. Prior thereto, there was general news and belief of the people that Mst. Rifat had committed suicide. Now if 10 days time as stated by P.W.13 is computed from 10-5-1993 it would fall back to 30-4-1993 when for the first time news regarding murder of Mst. Tahira came out, therefore, the statement of P.W.13 in this behalf appears to be genuine and is corroborated by the record. Objection regarding his i.e. P.W.13's non-joining the investigation prior to 10-5-1993 too, appears to be without any substance. It is an admitted position that P.W.13 came into picture, for the first time, on 10-5-1993 when accused Aslam allegedly confessed his guilt before him, and he reported the matter to the police besides producing accused Aslant before the police, therefore, his joining the investigation prior thereto was simply out of question. Now turning to the third objection regarding validity of extra-judicial confession made by accused Aslam before P.W.13 in the presence of police, we may observe that the trial Court was perhaps under a misconception, in this behalf. In his statement P.W.13 has categorically stated that:-- "Accused Aslam made statement before me. The Police came to the spot after an hour. 1 asked one Qadeer present in my house to bring the police. Aslant and Mst Riffat accused remained with me till arrival of the police." In the light of, the above portion of his statement, it is clear, that the accused had confessed his guilt before P.W.13, much prior to reaching of the police in his house. Therefore, observations of the trial Court in this behalf were unfounded. Even otherwise, (if the confession had not been so made) there would have been no need or reason to call the police, which fact, at the trial was not challenged. The record, as such, rules out the contention that Muhammad Aslam had made the extra-judicial confession before P.W.13 in the presence of police. Bar contained in Articles 38, 39 and 40 of the Qanun-e-Shahadat Order. 1994 would not, therefore, be attracted or applicable to the present case, as such. Regarding fourth objection to the effect that the Investigating Officer had no need to visit the house of Sabir. It may be observed that both the accused respondents namely, Muhammad Aslant and Mst. Rifat were arrested from the house of P.W.13 Sabir Hussain and as stated above, he had called the police, through Qadeer who was present in his house at the relevant time where as per Investigating Officer he on receiving the source report, had already left for the said house. This objection, therefore, is of no force. The next observations of the learned trial Court is with regard to the co -accused Ashraf's stay in the douse of Muhammad Khan for three days prior to making his extra-judicial confession. It has been considered by the learned trial Court that his stay, was not probable. It has come on record through the statement of P.W.14 that they were old friends. Therefore, there appears to be nothing unusual or improbable in it. Regarding the validity of confessions, law is well-settled now. Repeatedly, it has been laid down by the superior Courts that if a Court believes a confession, judicial or extra-judicial, retracted or un-retracted, to be voluntary and true, it can convict the accused on its sole basis. It is entirely a different matter, that since extra judicial confession is such type of evidence which can always be procured easily, therefore, the Courts have always treated the same as suspicious piece of evidence and have emphasized the necessity of great care and caution in acting upon it. As a matter of law, no corroboration of a confession is needed. The rule of law is that the confession is a relevant fact and that it is for the Court to determine its value keeping in view the circumstances of each case, therefore, it can be safely concluded that where relevancy of the confession is established then evidentiary value thereof would be a matter of prudence only, rather than of law. Reference in this behalf may be made to the case State v. Minhus alias Gul Hasan reported in PLD 1964 SC 813 wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan has been pleased to categorically observe as under:-- "As for the confessions the High Court, it appears, was duly conscious of the fact that retracted confessions, whether judicial or extra judicial, could legally be taken into consideration against the maker of those confessions himself, and if the confessions were found to be true and voluntary, then there was no need at all to look for further corroboration. It is now well-settled that as against the maker himself his confession, judicial or extra judicial, whether retracted or not retracted, can in law validly form the sole basis of his conviction, if the Court is satisfied and believes that it was true and voluntary and was not obtained by torture or coercion or inducement. The question, however, as to whether in the facts and circumstances of a given case the Court should act upon such a confession alone is an entirely different question, which relates to the weight and evidentiary value of the confession and not to its admissibility in law. As observed even by Munir, C.J. in his commentary on the law of Evidence at page 168 (Vol. I) it is settled rule of evidence that unless a retracted confession is corroborated in material particulars it is not prudent to base a conviction in a criminal case on its strength alone. It is the duty of the Court that is called upon to act upon a retracted confession to enquire into all the material points and surrounding circumstances and satisfy itself fully that the confession cannot but be true'. " In the instant case, the extra-judicial confessions, made by both the male accused persons, were proved to be voluntary and true, at the trial and the same were duly corroborated by the medical evidence, recovery of crime weapons, last seen evidence, other recoveries including the last worn clothes of the deceased as well as Parna of accused Mst. Riffat (respondent No. 3) with which the deceased's hands were found tied and the fact that the deceased before her death was subjected to zina, were sufficient to prove the charge of murder against the accused, particularly, when neither any enmity was alleged against the prosecution witnesses nor it was pleaded that they have had any motive to falsely implicate the accused persons. While expressing this view we are fortified by a judgment of the Supreme Court of Pakistan delivered in the case of Nazir Ahmed and others v. The State reported in 1994 SCMR 58 wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court in appreciation of circumstantial evidence i.e. extra-judicial confession which was duly corroborated by strangulation marks found on the dead body and recovery of dead body from the place where accused had stated they had thrown it, was pleased to uphold the conviction and sentences awarded to the accused. Relevant portion of the judgment reads as follows:-- "The testimony of Sher Muhammad P.W.4 regarding the extra-judicial confession made by the appellants to him cannot under any circumstances be brushed aside as not inspiring confidence. Sher Muhammad P.W.4 was not only the paternal-uncle of Muhammad Aslant acquitted accused. In addition, Talib Hussain appellant was the son of his cousin. The evidence of Sher Muhammad P.W.4 finds corroboration from the strangulation marks found on the body of the deceased, as also from the discovery of the dead body from that very, place where the appellants had stated that they had thrown it. Apart from the above, the learned counsel for the appellants did not seriously assail the last seen evidence furnished by Muhammad Sadiq P.W.5 and Noor Muhammad P.W.6. According to the testimony of the former, the deceased was last seen in company with the two appellants and the acquitted accused at 1.00 a.m. on 18-6-1984 as they were proceeding towards the village from Alipur City, whereas according to the latter they had seen the deceased moving out from the Chakki at 9.00 p.m. on 17-6-1984 at the invitation of the said persons, taking the cycle of Haji Ghulam Hussain P.W.2 with him. Having read the evidence and having taken into consideration all the circumstances relevant in that respect, the conviction and sentence o1 the appellants appears to be well-founded." In view of above discussion we find ourselves persuaded to believe the evidence regarding extra-judicial confession.

13. It has been next contended by the learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant that the recovery evidence particularly, relating to the blood stained weapons of offence, recovered from the house of accused, at their instance, was also wrongly rejected by the trial Court. Learned counsel for the appellant in this behalf vehemently asserted that the recoveries in question were effected by the police in the presence of impartial and independent witnesses who were residents of the locality, therefore, the trial Court ought to have believed the same, particularly, in the absence of any allegation of enmity or motive for false implication against the recovery witnesses. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents when confronted with the above submissions stated that these recoveries were effected with a delay of 24 days, therefore, the same were of no evidentiary value and the trial Court had rightly rejected the same. It may be observed here that in the instant case, the prosecution has relied on the recovery of various articles recovered separately, at different times. Last worn clothes of the deceased i.e. shirt Exh. P.1 and the brown colour parna with the help of which the hands of deceased were allegedly tied at her back were taken into possession by the police on 23-4-1993 through recovery memo. Exh. P.L. The same were handed over to the police by the doctor who had conducted the post-mortem of the deceased whereas, a red colour Shalwar Exh. P.7, blood-stained Dopatta P.11 and semi burnt black colour chappals P.8 were taken into possession by the police from the house of accused respondents on 30-4-1993. The same were allegedly recovered from a residential room of the said house which was being used as a store. The pillow cover which was allegedly filled with blood-stained earth too, was recovered from a pit situated in the aforementioned room/store on the same day i.e. 30-4-1993. Likewise the pieces of broken bangles which were found lying near the side pit were also recovered on 30-4-1993. The recovery of crime weapons i.e. blood-stained hatchet and chhurri was effected on 17-5-1993 from the house of the respondents at their instance and pointation vide recovery memos. Exh. P.D. and P.E. respectively. A minute study of the impugned judgment brings to light this fact that the learned trial Court, has though believed the recovery of hatchet as well as the chhurri but disbelieved the other recoveries due to the following two reasons:-- (i) That the recovery memos, have been shown to be signed by P.W. Daulat Ali and Mst. Fazal Noor, whereas, as per their statements, they never visited the house of the respondents subsequent to the day of occurrence, i.e. 23-4-1993, therefore, their presence at the time of recovery was not probable. (ii) That since pillow cover, broken bangles and semi-burnt chappals do not find mention in the inquest report, therefore, possibility that these were implanted subsequently, cannot be ruled out. A bare perusal of the judgment of the learned trial Court would reveal that while determining validity of these recoveries the learned trial Court instead of dealing with them separately has wrongly amalgamated the same, and in doing so has failed to take into consideration, this fact that these recoveries were effected separately, at different times and places. As stated above brown coloured Parna P.1 and last worn shirt of the deceased were handed over to the police by the doctor after conducting post-mortem of the deceased, therefore, recovery thereof cannot be disbelieved likewise the recovery of crime weapons i.e. blood-stained hatchet and chhurri was itself believed by the trial Court, though impliedly, in the following words:-- "Apart from this medical evidence and recoveries of hatchet Exh. P3 and Chhurri Ex. P.4, prosecution has not produced any other evidence to connect the accused with causing of these injuries by them to Mst. Tahira Bibi. Recovery of aforementioned articles was effected in the presence of P.Ws. Tariq Mahmood son of Qudratullah and Muhammad Akram son of Fazal Dad who are absolutely independent witnesses of the locality, therefore, there was no valid reason for the trial Court to disbelieve the same. Now we are left with the recoveries of pillow cover, chappals, broken bangles, pieces of Dopatta and Shalwar. As stated above, these recoveries were duly effected from a room of the respondents house which was being used as a store. Only objection to these recoveries is that these articles do not find mention in the inquest report. It may be observed here that the inquest report was prepared by the police on 23-4-1993 by A.S.I. Abdul Razzaq, while he was dealing with the suicidal case of Mst. Riffat as falsely given out by the accused in the report dated 23-4-1993 (Exh. P/H) and it was categorically stated in the report that they had neither any suspicion about the suicide nor anybody was blamed for the incident, in that behalf. It appears from record that the inquest report was prepared at the District Headquarter Hospital, Jhelum at the time of post -mortem, because the same has been duly attested by the Casualty Medical Officer. The record further reveals that the said A.S.I. after preparing the inquest report perhaps, in view of the statement made by "father of the deceased" became satisfied and did not bother to carry out inspection or thorough search of the place of occurrence. Therefore, in the circumstances non -mentioning of these articles in the inquest report, to our mind, is neither fatal to the prosecution case nor inconsistent with the facts. So far as subsequent visit of P W. Daulat Ali and Mst. Fazal Noor to the place of occurrence, is concerned it may be noted here that the learned trial Court has though referred to this portion of their statements that "after 23-4-1993 they did not visit the respondents' house" but has failed, to take into consideration, the statement of Investigating Officer in this behalf, who had categorically stated that he on 30-4-1993 alongwith P.W. Daulat Ali, Mst. Fazal Noor and Ch. Zareef inspected the place of occurrence, and this portion of his statement was not challenged by the defence. Further the recovery memos of these articles duly contain signatures of these P.Ws., therefore, prima facie their version appears to be true and genuine. It appears that P.W. Daulat Ali and Mst Fazal Noor while saying so meant that subsequent to 23-4-1993 they never visited the place of occurrence at their own, having been dishonoured by the respondents. In such view of the matter defence cannot take premium of such a minor discrepancy, if any, which otherwise is too, hyper technical in nature. The trial Court in the circumstances, was not justified in disbelieving or discarding the recoveries which in fact render sufficient corroboration to the prosecution case. As regards the objection raised by the learned counsel for the respondents, that since the alleged recoveries of hatchet and chhurri, from the house of the accused, were effected with a delay of 24 days, therefore, possibility of implantation cannot be ruled out, it may be observed that, as per record, the accused persons were arrested on 10-5-1993, whereas the recoveries were allegedly effected on 17-5-1993. As such, computed from the time of their arrest, the recoveries were effected on the 7th day which in peculiar circumstances of this case does not appear to be inordinate. It would be pertinent to mention here that the hatchet Exh. P.3 was recovered at the pointation of accused Muhammad Ashraf, from the house in question and the same was found concealed in the roof of chalani (kitchen) whereas the dagger/chhuree Exh. P.4 was recovered at the instance of accused Muhammad Aslam and the same was found buried in the compound of the said house beneath the northern window of the room, which is shown in the map as room No.

3. Both these places, wherefrom the recoveries were effected are situated in the house which was in possession of the accused/respondents. The same was also inhabited by their relatives as well. Therefore, the possibility and idea of any other person having an excess thereto for the purpose of implantation would not only be far-fetched but implausible as well. Further, the places of recovery particularly, the place wherefrom the dagger/chhuree was recovered, appears to be in exclusive and special knowledge of accused Muhammad Aslam, therefore, we see no reason to disbelieve the recoveries in view of the case-law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of Pakistan in the case of Nazir Hussain v. The State reported in 1984 SCMR 1382 wherein it has been observed that - "As pointed out already, Chhuri lay buried in the ground and the petitioner led the Investigating Officer precisely to the spot where it lay buried This special knowledge as to the spot where lay buried in the graveyard unmistakably leads to the conclusion of the petitioner's vicarious possession for which he was rightly convicted and sentenced, being unable to produce its licence. The petition is accordingly dismissed." As such, keeping in view the reliable evidence produced by the prosecution, the recoveries cannot be discarded on this ground alone that the same were effected on seventh day of remand, particularly in view of Serologist's Report which shows that both the recovered articles were stained with human blood. Learned counsel appearing for the respondents has also attempted to argue that though the incident had taken place on 23-4-1993, yet the recoveries were allegedly effected on 17-5-1993, therefore, the accused/ respondents have had sufficient time to take care of the crime weapons and destroy the same. In this behalf, it may be observed that keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the instant case non-destruction of the crime weapon/elimination of evidence appears to be probable because initially the plea of suicide was advanced by the accused/respondents which was not only believed by the inhabitants of the locality, but no suspicion was shown by the police authorities as well. It appears that the accused respondents being apparently successful in advancing the camouflage of suicide became careless and did not fell it necessary to destroy the evidence. It also appears from record that they were exposed to the real danger on 30-4-1993 for the first time when in consequence of a detailed inspection of the site bearing becoming out some signs, traces and piece of evidence of the crime, the report/F.I.R. was lodged by P.W.22 and proceedings were initiated against them for the murder of deceased Mst. Tahira, whereafter, they absconded. The accused/respondents, therefore, were neither available nor seen in their houses uptil the time of their arrest on 10-5-1993, thus they had practically no time and no chance to remove or destroy the crime weapons.

14. As regards Mr. Malik Rab Nawaz Noon's next contention that the last seen evidence too, was wrongly rejected by the learned trial Court, it may be observed that as is evident from the judgment, this aspect of the matter has not been properly attended to by the learned trial Court. The only reason advanced by the Court below in discarding the last seen evidence was that since no report regarding disappearance of deceased was lodged with the police by her parents uptill 30-4-1993, despite the fact that she was missing from 20-4-1993, therefore, their testimony in this behalf was not reliable. Obviously this view lacks in cogency and concurrence with facts. It has come on record through the depositions of P.Ws. 16 and 17 that on 23-4-1993 after hearing the news regarding commission of suicide by Mst. Rifat they immediately rushed to the house of the respondents but they were not permitted to enter the house on the pretext that since they were accusing Mst. Rifat for deceased Mst. Tahira's disappearance that is why she (Mst. Rifat) had committed the suicide. As discussed in the preceding paras. this portion of P.Ws. 16 and 17's statements was not challenged by the defence. The presumption would, therefore, be towards its truthfulness. Even otherwise, the learned trial Court itself while disbelieving the recoveries, relied upon this portion of their statements and observed that since as per these witnesses, they did not visit respondents' house subsequent to 23-4-1993, therefore, their witnessing the recoveries on 30-4-1993 was highly improbable. It is astonishing as to how, one can blow hot and cold in the same breath. In case the above referred portion of the P. Ws. 16 and 17's statements is believed then it cannot be said that they had not accused the respondents for the disappearance of Mst. Tahira prior to 30-4-1993. In the circumstances statements of these P. Ws. regarding leaving the deceased in the company of Mst. Rifat on 20-4-1993 in the presence of accused Muhammad Aslam have to be believed particularly when her (Mst. Tahira's) dead body was subsequently recovered from the house of the accused and was also found buried in their family graveyard. Another factor, which subscribes to the above view is, that the trial Court itself has convicted the male accused respondents under section 201/34, P.P.C. and have sentenced both of them to four years' R.I. and E a fine of Rs. 10,000 for causing disappearance of the evidence of murder, so that real offenders may be screened out. Thus, in view of above discussion, we are inclined to believe the last seen evidence, as well.

15. In order to supplement his next contention regarding conduct of the accused/respondents before and after the commission of crime, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant vehemently contended that the accused/respondents intentionally and deliberately tried to give this wrong impression that the dead body taken out from their house was that of Mst. Rifat. He added that the plea has been concocted by the accused in order to conceal the murder of Mst. Tahira. Learned counsel for the appellant further argued that from the very outset the respondents were trying to show and prove that the dead body in question was that of Mst. Rifat their daughter. In support of his argument learned counsel for the appellant further submitted that, in order to achieve the abovementioned target, the accused/respondents not only wrongly mentioned in the report Exh. P.G, that their daughter Mst. Rifat had committed suicide, but had also identified the dead body of Rifat, even before the doctor, who had conducted the post-mortem learned counsel for the appellant further added that in order to achieve their evil designs the accused persons also spread this rumour in the village that Mst. Tahira, daughter of the appellant had been abducted. In order to substantiate his above arguments learned counsel for the appellant has taken us through Exh. P.G. Relevant portion whereof reads as under:-- Learned counsel for the respondents while controverting the above arguments submitted that the respondents at the relevant time were under this bona fide impression that their daughter Mst. Rifat had in fact, committed suicide. That is why, they had not only made the report, but identified her dead body as such. A bare perusal of Exh. P.G. would reveal that it had unequivocally been stated therein that the respondents' daughter Mst. Rifat had committed suicide and that his father Muhammad Aslam had no doubt in this behalf. Record further reveals that the dead body was also identified by both the male respondents to be that of Mst. Rifat, before P. W.20 Dr. Ejaz Ahmad Shaikh, who had conducted post-mortem of the deceased. Following portion of his statement would be relevant:-- "On the same day a dead body of a lady Mst. Rifat Bibi wife of Muhammad Mahmood Jat by caste, resident of Nai Abadi Pakhwal, aged about 24/25 years was brought by Muhammad Razak No. 610 which was identified by Muhammad Ashraf son of Muhammad Alain and Muhammad Aslam son of Muhammad Alain resident of Nai Abadi Pakhwal, Jhelum for post-mortem examination." It has also come on record through the statement of P.W.14 that respondent Muhammad Ashraf had confessed before him that after killing Mst. Tahira they spread general news that Muhammad Aslam's daughter had committed suicide and that after post-mortem she was buried by, them. Relevant portion of the statement reads as under:-- "He further disclosed that after killing Mst. Tahira Bibi, they had spread a general news that Mst. Rifat daughter of Aslam accused had committed suicide. He further disclosed that the dead body of Mst. Tahira Bibi was got conducted post-mortem examination in the name of Mst. Rifat Bibi and buried the same as such. " No doubt during the course of their statements recorded under section 342, Cr.P.C. while confronted with this evidence, that as to why they had dishonestly made fake statement before the police, as well as other witnesses, that Mst. Rifat had committed suicide, and that the dead body recovered from their house was of her, the accused, while denying the accusation have pleaded that they under an honest and bona fide belief made such statement and acted in furtherance thereof. The record, however, patently belies their stand. Had the plea taken by the accused/respondents been true, they after seeing Mst. Rifat alive, must have immediately changed their stance and should have come out with the truth that the dead body taken out from their house, was not of Mst. Rifat, but was of somebody else. Obviously, it was not done. On the contrary the respondents during trial even, tried to prove and persuaded to believe the Court that the dead body in question was of Mst. Rifat. So much so, the prosecution witnesses were cross-examined on these lines for instance a reference is made to the statement of P.W.3, who during the course of his cross-examination and in consequence of a particular suggestion, made by the learned counsel for the accused/respondents stated as under:-- "It is correct that at that time it was told that daughter of Muhammad Aslam accused present in Court had committed suicide, and the dead body was of the said lady. I have not been informed by anybody at the spot that the dead body was not of the daughter of Muhammad Aslam accused." Likewise P.W. Sikandar Hayat who has signed the inquest report while being cross-examined, in answer to a suggestion, by the defence, deposed that:-- "I signed the inquest report after becoming satisfied that it was dead body of Mst. Rifat Bibi. After 15/20 minutes of my signatures, I returned to my shop. " From the above discussion it appears that the plea regarding commission of suicide by Mst. Rifat was concocted and honeycombed by the accused persons, so that not only the dead body of deceased could be disposed of behind the smoke screen, but police, village-mates and parents of the deceased Tahira might also be consoled and got satisfied under the garb and clog thereof, although in the meantime some doubts appear to have arisen, suspecting the accused respondents for the disappearance of Mst. Tahira. The subsequent conduct of the accused further strengthens this impression, particularly in view of the statement made by P.W. 12 Mumtaz Ali, who while deposing before the Court had categorically stated, that two days prior to the exhumation proceedings this rumour was spread by the accused that Mst. Tahira had been abducted. The exact wording is as under: "Two days before, the exhumation was rumour spread by the accused in the village that Mst. Tahira had been abducted. Two days prior to exhumation when I returned from the house of Aslam accused after offering fateha, I came to know in the village that daughter of Daulat Ali had been burnt to death. It was rumour in the village." It may be observed here that as per record, age of Mst. Rifat at the time of incident was 24/25 years whereas deceased Mst. Tahira was admittedly 13 to 14 years of age. Further Mst. Rifat was a married woman whereas Mst. Tahira was unmarried. The difference in corpulency and body structure cannot remain unnoticed by a naked eye-examination, particularly from the ladies and specially from the mother. The ladies of accused family must have seen the dead body soon after the incident particularly when she was given bath. In the circumstances, the hard fact, which comes out is that in order to conceal the commission of Zina as well as the murder of Mst. Tahira, a fake drama of Rifat's suicide, who is still alive as respondent No. 3, was deliberately and l fraudulently set up by the respondents. Another factor which strengthens this fact is that after the incident, parents of deceased Mst. Tahira also visited the respondents' house but they were not permitted to enter the same and to see the dead body, rather they were insulted and were asked to leave the house on the pretext that since they were persistently and falsely accusing Mst. Rifat to be responsible for disappearance of Mst. Tahira, therefore, she (Mst. Rifat) out of frustration, had committed suicide. In this behalf Mst. Fazal Noor P.W.16 has stated as under:-- "I heard the rumour of commission of suicide by Mst. Rifat accused at about 10.00 a.m. I and my husband on hearing this rumour, went to the house of Aslam accused, where a large number of persons of the village were gathered in the house of Muhammad Aslam. At that time, the room of the house was on fire. The inmates of the house on reaching us there, insulted us and did not allow us to enter into the room and we returned back. Thereafter, I never visited the house of aforementioned house of Aslam accused till today. " Whereas, statement of Daulat Ali, P. W. 17 reads as under:-- "There were 40 to 50 persons present in the house of accused when we visited on hearing the hue and cry of burning of house of the accused. My house is situated at a distance of 150 karams from the house of the accused. All the aforementioned persons were extinguishing the fire. We remained there for five to seven minutes. After our insult we did not go to the house of accused Muhammad Aslam, till today. " A bare perusal of the above would reveal that the parents of the deceased, according to a plan, were prevented from seeing the dead body because otherwise there was strong possibility that her mother Mst. Fazal Noor at least, could have easily recognized the dead body to be that of Mst. Tahira, particularly, when' the incident was fresh and the dead body was neither reportedly deshaped nor decomposed because of burning. In view of above discussion we are inclined to hold that conduct of the accused/respondents in the instant case was very much relevant as it renders sufficient corroboration to the other prosecution evidence particularly in view of the fact that the trial Court itself while taking notice of the same has convicted the male accused/respondents under section 201/34, P.P.C.

16. From the above discussion, we have come to the conclusion that guilt of the accused/respondents was fully brought home by the prosecution, through independent and reliable evidence and that the trial Court was not justified in acquitting them of the charges. We would, therefore, accept Criminal Appeal No. 106/1 of 1995 and sentence both the male accused/respondents Muhammad Aslam as well as Muhammad Ashraf to death under section 302(b) read with section 34/109, P.P.C. for committing murder of deceased Mst. Tahira. They shall be hanged by the neck till they are dead. So far as the case of accused/respondent No. 3 Mst. Rifat is concerned, though it has been established on record that she was fully involved and was in league with other accused/respondents in committing the murder of Mst. Tahira and she had in fact played a specific part in the commission of the offence by actively facilitating and helping the other accused/respondents thereby sharing the vicarious liability of the murder with other accused and that all the accused/respondents had committed the offence in question in furtherance of their common intention as well as the object anal that the Court is not supposed to apportion liability of each accused according to his/her overt act and that Mst. Rifat by dint of section 34/109, P.P.C. can be convicted and sentenced to death alongwith other accused/respondents yet since as per evidence available on record it cannot be said with certainty that at the exact time of murder she was present at the scene of occurrence when the fatal injuries were allegedly inflicted by both the male accused/respondents before setting the dead body of Mst. Tahira on fire, we feel, that the sentence of life imprisonment would be adequate, in her case. We accordingly, convict and sentence her to life imprisonment under section 302(b) read with section 34/109, P.P.C.

17. Since it has also been established on record that Mst. Tahira, before her murder, was also subjected to Zina-bil-Jabr by Muhammad Aslam accused, therefore, we also convict him under section 10(3) of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979 and sentence him to suffer ten years' rigorous imprisonment.

18. We have carefully considered Criminal Revision No. 20/1 of 1995 preferred by Daulat Ali for increase in the amount of compensation and enhancement of sentences of Muhammad Aslam and Muhammad Ashraf under section 201/34, P.P.C. We have also considered Criminal Appeal No. 129/1 of 1995 filed by Muhammad Aslam and Muhammad Ashraf accused/appellants whereby they have challenged their conviction and sentences under section 201/34 P.P.C: However, we have come to the conclusion that keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case both the said Criminal Revision as well as the said Criminal appeal are liable to be dismissed as the sentence awarded by the trial Court is proper and sufficient and we, for the abovementioned reasons of our own, maintain the same.

19. It has also been established on record that Mr. Rifat accused was also knowingly involved in causing disappearance of the evidence of the commission of murder so that the real offenders may be screened out from legal punishment, therefore, we are also inclined to set aside her acquittal under section 201/34, P.P.C., and convict and sentence her thereunder to four years' rigorous imprisonment alongwith a fine of Rs. 10,000 or in default thereof shall further undergo three months' simple imprisonment. The amount of fine if recovered, shall be paid to the legal heirs of deceased Mst. Tahira under section 544-A, Cr.P.C. Both the sentences awarded to her shall concurrently. They shall be taken into custody to serve out the above sentences, according to law. Consequently, Criminal Appeal No. 106/I of 1995 is allowed in the terms referred to above while Criminal Appeal No. 129/1 of 1995 as well as Criminal Revision No. 20/I of 1995 are dismissed. N.H.Q./1152/FSC Appeal allowed.