1969 P Cr (PLP)

MUHAMMAD MUNIR, C. J.‑

This is an appeal by special leave by Mamman son of Khan and Mamman son of Bahadur, whose sentences of death for murder have been confirmed by the High Court of Lahore. The deceased man, Nur Muhammad, was attacked on the morning of 8th June 1953, at Chah Siddanwala. He suffered ten injuries, of which two were caused by a sharp‑edged‑pointed weapon, and the rest by blunt weapon. The former were both individually sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death. The injured man was immediately taken to Police Station Gogera, two miles away, where his statement was recorded by a Third Class Magistrate at 7‑30 o'clock. In that a statement the dying man alleged that he had been attacked by the two appellants and four other persons, namely, Hamid, Rehman, Hussain and Nura. He died i4 consequence of the injuries the same day at 12‑45 p.m. The police investigated the case and put in a final report against the appellants and four other persons, namely, Hamid, Shamir, Saeed and Amir. At the trial evidence against the appel lants consisted of the depositions of Jahangir, a nephew of the deceased, Sardar Ali the landlord of the deceased and Ali Akbar, son of Sardar Ali. According to the evidence of these eye‑witnesses the deceased was attacked by the appellants, of whom, Mamman son of Khan was armed with an axe, and Mamman son of Bahadur with a spear, and by Hamid, Shamir and Amir. The High Court has taken the view that the three eye‑witnesses are all disinterested and their allegation so far as the appellants are concerned is corroborated by the dying declaration of the deceased. As against Mamman son of Bahadur appellant, there is the further corroboration furnished by the two injuries on the chest of the deceased which were caused with a sharp‑edged‑pointed weapon, each of which was, according to the medical evidence, individually fatal. Prima facie, therefore, there is no ground for this Court to interfere in the exercise of its extraordinary jurisdic tion. The fact that the evidence of the eye‑witnesses conflicts with the dying declaration in regard to persons who have been acquitted does not in any way affect the case against the appellants. The only other point urged by Mr. Manzur Qadir was that according to medical evidence no injuries were detected on the person of the deceased which might have been caused by a sharp‑edged instrument like an axe. The doctor who examined Nur Muhammad before his death stated that one of the injuries on the head had been caused with a sharp‑edged instrument but the doctor who performed the post‑mortem examination expressed the opinion that none of the injuries appeared to have been caused with a sharp‑edged weapon. The High Court has dealt with his point and found that it is not necessary that a sharp‑edged instrument should always cause incised wounds. After hearing the learned counsel for the appellants we cannot discover any sufficient reasons to interfere and therefore dismiss this appeal. Appeal dismissed.