2006 PLP 1924 (YLR)

MIAN MUHAMMAD NAJUM UZ-ZAMAN, J.

Appellant Khadim Hussain was tried for the murder of his wife Mst. Zareena Bibi and mother-in-law Mst. Sardaran Bibi in case F.I.R. No.1142 dated 23-10-1998 registered under section 302 P.P.C. at Police Station Jaranwala by the Sessions Judge, Faisalabad who vide judgment dated 13-7-2000 convicted the appellant under section 302(b), P.P.C. and sentenced him to death on two counts as well as to pay compensation amounting to Rs.50,000 to the legal heirs of each deceased namely Mst. Zareena Bibi and Mst. Sardaran Bibi or in default whereof to undergo six months R.I. on each count.

2. Challenging his conviction and sentence appellant filed Criminal Appeal No.189-J of 2000 while the trial Court has made a reference (M.R. No.510/2000) seeking confirmation of death sentence; awarded to the appellant.

3. Briefly the facts of the prosecution case as narrated in F.I.R. lodged by Muhammad Riaz complainant P.W. 10 are that on 23-10-1998 at about 9-00 a. m. on the call of Mst. Zareena Bibi deceased, Mst. Sardaran Bibi visited her house to assist her daughter (Mst. Zareena Bibi deceased) in her domestic work and Mst. Sardaran Bibi was plastering the courtyard with clay when all of a sudden Khadim Hussain appellant came in the house and inquired from his wife Mst. Zareena Bibi deceased as to why she had called her mother in the house. On the reply of Mst. Zareena Bibi deceased that she had called her being her mother the accused became infuriated and fired three shots one after the others with his .12 bore gun (double barrel; which hit Mst. Sardaran Bibi on the chest. writs of right arm, left arm and left shoulder. When Mst. Zareena Bibi deceased stepped forward to 'rescuer her mother, the accused also fired hitting Mst Zareena Bibi below the left side of chest On the alarm raised by complainant (Muhammad Riaz P.W.10) Shaukat Ali P.W.11 and Akhtar Ali (given up P.W.; were also attracted to the spot and saw the occurrence. Motive being the occurrence was that Mst. Zareena Bibi in disobedience of her husband (Khadim Hussain accused) had called her mother for plastering with clay which caused annoyance to the accused who killed both the ladies.

4. After the registration of case and complying with legal formalities the Investigating Officer submitted challan before the trial Court where prosecution produced twelve witnesses including Muhammad Riaz P.W.10 and Shaukat Ali P.W.11, the eye-witnesses of the occurrence, to prove the charge against the appellant.

5. Trial Court also examined the appellant under section 342, Cr.P.C. who while answering to the question, why the P.Ws. have deposed against you? replied as under:-- "Both the deceased were killed by unknown person and I have been falsely involved in the case as the complainant wants to usurp my movable and immoveable property." The appellant neither made any statement under section 340(2), Cr.P.C. nor produced any evidence in defence.

6. Trial Court after appraisal of evidence available on record, vide judgment dated 13-7-2000, convicted and sentenced the appellant as narrated earlier.

7. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that appellant has been falsely involved in this case, he had cordial relations with his wife Mst. Zareena Bibi deceased, he never objected to the visit of his mother-in-law and there was no occasion for him to kill his own wife and mother-in-law. It is further submitted that complainant of this case who is father-in-law of the appellant has involved him in this case with mala fide intention in order to usurp the property of the appellant i.e. his house. Submits that no independent witness was produced by the prosecution in support of the case, there is no evidence to show that the weapon of offence allegedly recovered at the instance of the appellant was ever used in the occurrence and that in the circumstances the trial Court has erroneously convicted and sentenced the appellant. Conversely, learned counsel for the state while supporting the impugned judgment vehemently opposed the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the appellant.

8. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and perusing the record, we have observed that it is a case of single accused who had committed the murder of his wife Mst. Zareena Bibi and mother-in-law namely Mst. Sardaran Bibi daring the bright hours of the day i.e. on 23-10-1998 at 9-00 a.m. in his house. The matter was promptly reported to the police by Muhammad Riaz P.W.10 (father-in-law of the appellant) giving all the minor details of the occurrence on the same day at 11-30 a.m. The promptness in lodging the F.I.R. rules out the possibility of concoction, fabrication and false implication of the appellant. At the relevant time Muhammad Riaz P.W.10 who is father-in-law of the appellant and a resident of the same area was present in the house of the appellant when this occurrence took place. His presence in the house of his daughter (place of occurrence) at the relevant time seems to be very natural and normal. He also stood test of lengthy and searching cross-examination and there is nothing in his statement to doubt his credibility or to say that he had any malice against his son in law to falsely involve him in this case. His statement also finds support from the evidence of Shaukat Ali P.W.11 a resident of same area who on hearing the fire-shot came at the spot and saw the appellant holding a double barrel gun in his hand whereas Mst. Sardaran Bibi and Mst. Zareena Bibi were lying on the ground in injured conditions. This witness is neither related to any of the party nor had any enmity against the appellant and is absolutely independent and disinterested witness. The ocular account further finds support from the medical evidence which reveals that both the ladies had died because of the fire-arm injuries as narrated by the eye-witnesses. The location, duration and nature of injuries as narrated by the complainant find support from the post-mortem report prepared by Lady Dr. Farhat Rasheed Gorigha P. W .1.

9. In a case of single accused substitution by kith and kin of the deceased is a rare phenomenon. The false involvement of the appellant in this case for the murder of his own wife and mother-in-law by his father-in-law and other independent witnesses is out of question. The evidence available on record inspires confidence, rings true and in the circumstances we are persuaded to rely upon the same. Finding no force in the instant appeal the same stands dismissed. Death sentence of the appellant on both counts is confirmed and the murder reference is answered in the affirmative. H.B.T./K-30/L Appeal dismissed.