1987 PLP 3155 (MLD)

3. Allah Bakhsh, S.I./S.H.O. after recording the F.I.R. went to the spot. He despatched the dead body for post-mortem examination after preparing necessary documents, and secured blood-stained earth therefrom. The appellant was arrested by him. Blood-stained Kassi, recovered from the appellant was taken into possession vide memo Ex. PG. Bloodstained bedding and clothes were also taken into possession by the S.H.O.

4. At the trial prosecution had examined nine witnesses in all. Dr. Abdur Razzaq who had performed autopsy was examined as P.W.5. He had noted fifteen injuries in all, which included abrasions and incised wounds. The doctor opined that the deceased had died due to the shock and haemorrhage, as a result of injury No. 1 which has been described as follows:- "Multiple cuts on the front of neck at the level of thyroid cartilage. The thyroid cartilage had been cut and the cuts were in the area of 15 x 8 c.m. There was cutting of mussels of the front of neck. There was multiple cut on the tracheae. It had been cut into many pieces. There were cutting of the major blood vessels of the neck. The underlying cervical vertebra under the injury were also cut alongwith spinal -ord. The face, neck, and chest were stained with blood"

5. The ocular account was narrated by Muhammad Nawaz P. W.7 and Abdullah P.W.8. Muhammad Nawaz re-narrated the facts given by him in the first information report. Abdullah P.W.8 corroborated his statement in so far as it pertained to the actual occurrence. He also stated about having witnessed the recoveries from the spot, including blood stained kassi P.7, snatched from the appellant.

6. The appellant during his statement under section 342 of the Code of Criminal Procedure denied the prosecution case as a whole and pleaded innocence. In answer to question, why this case against you', he stated as follows:- "Mst. Mumtaz Bibi was my wife. I had all the love for her. On the night of occurrence I had gone from my fields with a kassi.. I placed that kassi near my cot. I wanted to have a sexual intercourse with my wife. On my repeated requests she did not agree to my proposal, rather she started abusing me and taunted me that I was impotent and that she would get a divorce from me and would marry Fazil son of Murad Mangan whom she said, she loved desperately. I lost all my balance and control and got highly provoked over the conduct and confession of un-chastity of my wife and I picked up a kassi lying thereby and under grave and sudden provocation caused injuries to her. I then myself appeared before the Police. None of the P.Ws. namely Muhammad 'Nawaz, Farid or Abdullah were present near the spot."

7. Learned counsel for the appellant did not challenge the conviction of the appellant under Section 304, Part I, P.P.C. in view of the admission of occurrence by the appellant himself. He, however, vehemently argued that in view of the grave provocation given by the deceased to the appellant, the sentence of imprisonment of 10 years R.I. was excessive. He pleaded that the sentence of 5 years R.I. plus the sentence of fine awarded by the trial Judge, in this case, will meet the ends of justice.

8. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the state argued that the sentence awarded by the trial Judge does not call for any interference.

9. I have gone through the impugned judgment and have considered the reasons noted by learned trial Judge for discarding statement of the two eye-witnesses. The reasons recorded in this regard, are A based on correct appreciation of evidence and do not call for any interference. Conviction of the appellant recorded by the learned trial Judge on the basis of the statement made by the appellant and the plea taken by him, therefore, does not call for any interference. The same is maintained. Coming to the quantum of sentence, I feel inclined to agree with the argument of learned counsel for the appellant that the taunting reply of the deceased to the appellant that he was impotent, and that she would marry Fazil son of Murad after getting divorce from him (and that too when she had returned to the house of the appellant after having lived away from him for almost a year) must have given him enough provocation to attack the deceased. Considering this aspect, I feel, the sentence of 10 years R.I. awarded to the appellant is excessive. The same is, therefore, reduced to R.I. for six years. The sentence of fine and the order of imprisonment in default thereof, is however, maintained. The appellant shall also be given benefit of the provisions of Section 382-B of the Code of Criminal Procedure. S. A. /1-34/L Sentence reduced.