1987 PLP 2009 (SCMR)

SAAD SAOOD JAN, J.‑‑Khushi Muhammad and Maqbool alias Koola petitioners in this petition for special leave to appeal were convicted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Multan of an offence under section 302, read with section 34, of the Pakistan Penal Code for causing the death of Muhammad Rafique deceased and were sentenced to suffer imprisonment for life and to pay fine. On appeal, the High Court maintained their convictions and sentences. They now seek leave to appeal to challenge their convictions and sentences.

2. At the trial the case of the prosecution was that on 17‑2‑1981 at about 9‑00/10‑00 p.m., the deceased, his brother Muhammad Shafi, Nazar Hussain and Muhammad Ramzan were going to a cinema house. When they reached the gate of the Ghalli Mandi they met the two petitioners together with Ali Sher who was acquitted by the trial Court and Maqsooda who later absconded. The petitioners cursed the deceased for associating with their enemies and said that they would teach him a lesson for sitting on their enemies shops. Immediately thereafter Ali Sher and Maqsooda secured the deceased while the petitioners stabbed him in the face, left flank and back with chhuris. On the alarm raised by his companions the petitioners and their co‑accused ran away. The deceased was removed first to the Civil Hospital and then to the Nishtar Hospital where he expired on 21‑2‑1981. The occurrence was reported to the police on 18‑2‑1981 at about 11‑00 a.m. The petitioners pleaded not guilty to the charge of murdering the deceased. They alleged that they had been falsely implicated. Khushi Muhammad produced one witness in defence to prove a site plan which indicated that Nazar Hussain, an eye‑witness, lived at a distance of 100 Karams from the spot. At the trial the main evidence against the petitioners was provided by Muhammad Shafi (P.W.10) and Nazar Hussain (P.W.11). They stated that the time of occurrence they were going with the deceased to a cinema house. They described the manner in which the occurrence took place and alleged that the two petitioners had given Chhuri blows to the deceased. The trial Court and the High Court accepted their testimony and we see no reason to disbelieve them. There was nothing extraordinary about the deceased accompanying these witnesses to a cinema house.

3. The main argument addressed in support of this petition centred round the delay in reporting the matter to the police and the fact that the statement of the complainant was recorded on the way‑side and not at the Police Station. We do not think that in this case the delay in lodging the F .I . R . or the fact that it was not recorded at the Police Station affects the credibility of the eye‑witnesses whose presence at the spot does not appear to be un‑natural and who had no reason to falsely name the petitioners for causing the death of the deceased. The evidence on record is sufficient to support the conviction of the petitioners. For the offence under section 302, read with section 34, of the Pakistan Penal Code they have already been given the benefit of the lesser sentence. There is no merit in this petition which is hereby dismissed. S.Q./K‑30/S Petition dismissed.