2008 PLP 1570 (YLR)

BASHIR A. MUJAHID, J.--Muhammad Saleem, appellant has challenged judgment dated 29-10-2001 passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Faisalabad whereby he was convicted under section 302(b), P.P.C. for murder of Khadim Hussain and sentenced to imprisonment for life and was also ordered to pay compensation of Rs. 50,000 to the legal heirs of the deceased under section 544-A, Cr.P.C. failing which he had to undergo R.I. for one year. Benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C. was however, extended in his favour. The brief facts of the case are that F.I.R. No. 392/93 dated 6-10-1993 under sections 302/34/148/149, P.P.C. was registered at P.S. Nishatabad, Faisalabad at the instance of Mukhtar Ahmed, P.W.9 with the allegation that the accused persons namely, Muhammad Saleem, Muhammad Ameen, Muhammad Akram, Muhammad Yaseen and Akhtar alias Akhtari sons of Muhammad Hussain on 6-10-1993 at 3-30 p.m. formed unlawful assembly and duly armed with weapons launched attack at the Khadim Hussain (deceased). The appellant was declared proclaimed offender while his co-accused Muhammad Akram was tried and convicted by the trial Court vide judgment dated 26-5-1996 and sentenced to death under section 302(b), P.P.C. and his appeal (C.A.No.486/1996) was dismissed by a Division Bench of the Court but the sentence was altered to imprisonment for life vide judgment dated 31-5-2001. The appellant was arrested subsequently and challan against him was submitted in trial Court. The trial Court examined as many as 15 witnesses to prove the guilt of the accused. The medical evidence was furnished by Dr. Muhammad Nawaz, P.W.7 who conducted the post-mortem examination on the dead-body of Khadim Hussain. Mukhtar Ahmad, complainant was examined as P.W.9, who supported the version of the F.I.R. and narrated the motive for the alleged occurrence. Muhammad Yousaf was examined as P.W.10 who was also eyewitness of the occurrence. He was son-in-law of the complainant. He supported the complainant and attested the recovery memo of blood-stained earth Exh. P.C. Muhammad Hussain, son of the complainant was examined as P.W 11, he was also eyewitness of the occurrence, his statement was in line with that of the complainant, P. W.9 and Muhammad Yousaf P. W.10. Muhammad Shahbaz, P.W.8 attested the recovery memo. Exh. PH whereby rifle was recovered at the instance of Muhammad Saleem. Muhammad Sibtain Shah, P. W.13 had investigated the case. Abid Ghani, S.-I. P.W.14 had arrested Muhammad Saleem and Muhammad Akram, accused. The trial culminated into conviction and sentence of the appellant as mentioned above. Hence this appeal. Learned counsel for the appellant despite the notice issued on several dates has not turned up, therefore, I have appointed Mr. A.D. Arif, Advocate as defence counsel. Learned defence counsel after going through the record has argued that the appellant has been falsely implicated and was wrongly declared proclaimed offender or not available in the area about his involvement in the case. The appeal has been opposed by learned counsel for the State. Heard. Record perused. It was a daylight occurrence took place at 3-30 p.m. and F.I.R. was promptly recorded at 5-20 p.m. The name of the accused were specifically mentioned. He was armed with rifle which was also recovered on his arrest. His case is at par with Muhammad Akram who was awarded lesser sentence by this Court in his appeal as the allegation against the present appellant is also the same. The ocular account furnished by Mukhtar Ahmad, P.W.9, Muhammad Yousaf, P.W.10 and Muhammad Hussain, P.W. 12 has been fully corroborated by medical evidence and absconsion of the appellant. In view of the above, after reappraisal of the evidence I do not find any force in the appeal therefore, the same is dismissed and the conviction and sentence is maintained. However, benefit of section 382-B, Cr.P.C. shall be available to the appellant. N.H.Q. /M-533/L Appeal dismissed.